Analyzing the Maoist Concept Paper

Analysis of the Maoist Concept Paper: Legitimacy of Interim government, Interim Parliament and Peace Accord Ended

Conflict Study CenterContributed by: Bishnu Pathak, PhD and Chitra Niraula

The following is the unofficial translation of the first-ever Concept Paper, after initiation of the Peace Process, prepared by CPN (Maoist) Supremo Prachanda and presented by Dr. Baburam Bhattarai on Nov 16, 2007 to the Political Parties, Civil Society and Media:

Preamble of the Paper

The serious impediments to peace process and political advancement of Nepal have been accepted by all quarters. The 12-point Understanding between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and CPN (Maoists) or (SPAM) was concluded on Nov 22, 2005 for democracy, peace and advancement. The political journey ventured through Peace Accord, Interim Constitution (IC), Interim Parliament (IP) and Interim Government (IG) and fell into peril, consequently the agenda on Constituent Assembly (CA) election, establishment of Federal Republic, and the forward looking economic and social transformation that has been agreed by both parties have not been implemented. This has ensnared the entire peace process towards impasse. The present critical situation calls to review all the earlier peace agreements and conclude new political unity based on new grounds.

Overview

A. The 19-day long Popular Movement resulting from the unity of the Maoists, who had been waging ‘People’s War’ against feudalism and monarchy since 11 years, and the SPA, waging peaceful movement against the absolute monarchy, based on the 12-point Understanding ousted the king from power. The constitutional parties went against the 12-point Understanding and merely took up restoration of Parliament and pushed aside all the other agendas, diverting the establishment of republic away from the doorstep.

B. After some hustles with the SPA, on June 16, 2006, the 8-point Agreement was concluded for democracy, peace and advancement. Again passing through ups and downs, on Oct 8, 2006 a political consensus was reached with the SPA. On Nov 21, 2006, the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) was signed with the government and the confinement of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the government army into cantonments and barracks, respectively took off. The IC was proclaimed by the IP on Jan 15, 2007. The conflict management and political advancement, absolutely through the internal efforts, without any outside involvement, is a unique model for the world.

C. CA election on mid-June 2007 was the focused purpose of the Understandings and Agreements along with the IP and IC. The violent and destructive movement in Madhes, through forces that were not in existence prior to signing of the accord, were intentionally designed and instigated by the reactionary royalist, domestic and foreign forces to disrupt the peace process including CA election. The Gaur massacre was the climax of the counter-revolutionary forces.

D. Reacting against the counter-revolution, Maoists entered into the government on March 31, 2007 expressing its solemn commitment to the peace process. The CA election was dramatically deferred. The Maoists declared the deferral of the CA polls on schedule as a violation of the peace process through a note of dissent in a high-level meeting of SPAM. Maoists forwarded the 22-point preconditions because of the deferral of the CA polls, the conclusion of which is CA can not be confirmed until the monarchy exists and is meaningless unless full proportional electoral system is adopted. Maoists resigned from the IG on Sept 18, 2007 because these two preconditions were not met.

E. On Nov 4, 2007 the Special Session of the IP on the motion of Urgent Public Importance by a simple majority passed the federal republic and proportional electoral system, which has placed the ball in the Nepali Congress’s court.

Identification of the Key Problem

A. There exist serious problems regarding the viewpoint of Maoists and SPA on peace process and political events. Although there are grave differences, SPAM has agreed to declare federal republic, which is the essence of all the Understandings and Agreements, IC and IP, and the Minimum Common Program. All these documents include the clause ‘forward looking restructuration of the state to address the problems relating to classes, ethnicities/castes, regions and gender’, and that is the commitment of both the parties to create a new political mainstream. The status quest outlook of NC is the hinderance to the political impasse.

B. The political Agreements and Understandings will not be implemented until the unitary state power, security mechanism, bureaucracy, socio-economic dynamism supporting the monarchist and feudalist system exists. The incapable leadership of NC is the principal element of political impasse.

C. The special geo-political situation of Nepal has invited the foul play and involvement of foreign power-centers. The evidence is the Madhes incidents after signing of the Peace Accord. The issue of serious concern is the lack of national unity and understanding of the political parties when the sovereignty and geographical integrity of the country is in grave danger.

D. The lack of stringent implementation of the provision of conflict management in the peace process and widening the gap between the conflicting parties are the principal problems. The poor management and care of the PLA, lack of minimum compensation to the Martyr’s families, investigation of the disappearances, are the clear challenges of the peace process.

E. Another obstacle is lack of understanding by the political parties that restructuration of the State is the restructuration of the security sector.

F. Non-participation of various ethnic and regional liberation fronts, people’s representatives, civil agitators in the peace process and political consensus resulted in the increase of violent incidents like Madhes. Another factor is the hegemony of the NC in power division in the IG. Lack of the programs affecting directly to and bringing positive change in the lives of the people during the interim period is another aspect of the problem.

Road map

There are two aspects to peace process: politico-ideology and procedural.

Politico-ideology:

• High-level dialogue to minimize the differences for creation of a new political mainstream, recognizing the differences between the parliamentarian parties and Maoists, and realization of the essence of the peace agreement by both;
• Re-commitment of both the parties to establish federal democratic republic abolishing feudalism and monarchy;
• Resolution to National Unity for promotion and protection of Independence, Sovereignty and Geographical Integrity;
• Build common understanding on proclamation of republic and CA election to be held as early as possible;
• Build consensus through a serious dialogue of the concerned actors on a uniform model of the proportionate electoral system;
• Restructuration of the security sector through democratization of Nepalese army and integration of the PLA; and
• Socio-economic transformation policies, based on peace accord and IC, to be implemented stringently.

Procedural:

• Formation of a High-Level Task Force consisting of both the sides to review the contents and implementation and recommend amendments and/or revision to all the Agreements and Understandings;
• An extensive political conference of democratic political forces like castes, ethnicities, regions, madhes, women, dalit, muslim, minorities, professionals, civil society representatives to end the political impasse;
• If necessary, effort to change the government leadership also to maintain the unity between the peace process and political parties;
• Rigorous implementation of the resolutions of the IP on republic and proportionate electoral system;
• A State Restructuration Commission to Management and care of PLA, distribution of compensation to Martyr’s families, and treatment to wounded, a High-Level Commission to investigate to the disappearances, a Land Related Commission and Corruption Investigation Commission as per the 22-point preconditions forwarded by Maoists;
• Dissolution of the one-sided Peace and Reconstruction Ministry and formation of a powerful Peace and Reconstruction Commission;
• Reformation of IG through re-division of power and responsibility in a new way; and operate the government based on the minimum common program; and
• Build political consensus and environment conducive to mutual-confidence prior to declaring new date for CA election, and the State and all the political forces to be unified to execute it.

Analysis of the Concept Paper and Conclusion

Part three of the CPA has 13 points dealing with the letter and spirit of the conflict management. The first one covers political, social and economic transformation, but nothing of substance has been done. Similarly, the second states to conduct CA polls by mid-June 2007 in a free and fair environment, but the date was postponed affecting the sovereign rights of Nepali citizens. At first, the date was deferred for two weeks. As Maoists joined the IP and then IG, the Election Commission (EC) declared it not possible to hold the election because it would require at least 110 days preparing the election. The statement was made by the EC instead of the PM or the government, and was under fire from all quarters.

Maoists alleged that the domestic and foreign forces played behind the postponment fearing they would win. It also wrote the note of dissent in the High-Level Meeting, but agreed to hold election on Nov 22. The government deferred the date of the election three times without an excuse to the people nor did it resign based on morality. The third point deals with seizing and transferring the property of the late King Birendra and family to a Trust, which is partially fulfilled. Similarly, the property of King Gyanendra kept foreign banks on abroad clandestinely and those transferred from Birendra have not been made public. The property hukum baks (granted) to the persons for nepotism and favoritism during the regime of Tribhuvan, Mahendra and Birendra is not known.

The fourth tackles the respect of human rights, competitive democratic system, sovereignty inherent in Nepalis, constitutional balance and control, rule of law, social justice and equality, etc. but people’s right to life, liberty and security are violated day in and day out. The INSEC, local human rights organization, reports that 234 people were killed, of which 12% and 9% were attributed to the government and the Maoists respectively in the one-year tenure of Peace Accord. Similarly, the Maoists abducted 64% of persons out of 772 cases in the last year. In the Central region only (10 districts of Madhes), 82 persons have been killed within the six month period. In a year period, 41% Nepal suffered from either general strikes or valley strikes, regional strikes and district strikes.

The fifth consists of ending the unitary and centralized structure of State, which continues until date and lacks federal and inclusive character. The State restructuration process based on class, caste, sex, language and regionalism has not been initiated. The sixth stipulates to end all kinds of feudalism by developing minimum common program, but nothing has been done. The seventh deals with ending feudal land ownership and executing scientific land reform, which has not taken a step ahead. The eighth one relates to promoting national industries; is it not due to this that many industries are being closed and quite a few joint venture companies are quitting? The ninth point deals with citizen’s rights to education, health, housing, employment and food security. Nothing has been done to achieve these, even during the Dashain Festival the people in the Mountain regions had no food to eat. The tenth point states economic and social security for the disadvantaged groups, which has remained in paper. The eleventh one states to meet strong action against corrupt individuals, which has remained hypothetical, because the main alleged culprits are still in power in government, bureaucracy and so on. The twelfth one calls for creating a common development concept for the nation’s economic and social transformation. The thirteenth deals in employment and professional rights.

Part 4 deals with Arms and Armies Management. UNMIN is conducting second round verification of Maoist PLA confined in the cantonments, but progress is in snail motion. Nothing, not even policy development, has been implemented towards democratization of the Nepalese Army and integration of both the armies into a National Army. It was decided to provide the facilities to Maoist PLA equal to the Nepal Army, but they received the allowance for only four months during the one-year period.

The part 5 consisting of demising through neutralizing and eliminating the mines within 60 days has only been tried as a model, the rest are as they are. It also deals with the Cease Fire Monitoring Committee that remains in the document only. Similarly, it has stopped the practice of forced extortion and taxes (cash and kind) against law, which has not stopped. In recent months, there has been a frequent report of extortion from both local and foreign groups, although the Maoists claimed voluntary contribution. It also states to release the cadres from custody within 15 days of the signing of the accord, to which only high-level leaders were released and many still remain to be released. The government has not taken any steps to get the one and a half dozen Maoist cadres imprisoned in Uttar Pradesh, India. It also states to declare or notify the families the whereabouts of the disappeared within 60 days, but no one has been declared or notified yet. On the issue of rehabilitation and relief to the victims of war, it calls for forming of a National Peace and Rehabilitation Commission, which has been established in name but is defunct. A high-level Truth and Reconciliation Commission was targeted to be formed to address grave human rights violations and abuses during the armed conflict, but in vain. The pledge to reestablish the development infrastructures destroyed and respectfully rehabilitate the displaced people during the war has merely taken tortoise steps.

Maoists are pressuring towards immediate implementation of the federal structure of governance and full proportionate electoral system (resolved by the IP by simple majority). The NC not only has caste vote against these agenda in the Special Session of the IP, but also meetings of NC’s Central Committee and Parliamentary Committee declined to implement the directive of the IP. The resolution requires 2/3 majority in the IP to revise the IC. Some pro-monarchial individuals of NC stated that they would go against the party whip to caste vote for the revision. Maoist leaders have declared to change the government leadership through the streets saying budho goru le gai ogatnu mildaina (remove the old bull overtaking the cow). The gap between the two sides is ever-widening and reaching critical point - initiating political cyclone ‘segregation of the conflict state III’, which indicates messing of the CA polls. The Maoists have given top priority to declaration of a republic rather than CA polls.

Briefly, only 10% letter and spirit of 10-point peace accord has been implemented, which resulted a huge level of frustration in all tiers. More frustration is found in the Maoists activists due to leaders have started to lead luxury lives spending most of the time in Kathmandu and other urban centers. Activists are living with very poor conditions with limited resources and contact with leaderships. Such frustration is leading to more abduction to the opponents often owing to personal retribution rather than wider political motive. On the other side, as they are receiving an enormous pressure to resume people’s court (kangaroo court) and people’s government - ‘parallel government in district and local levels’ similar to before peace accord. Reestablishment of these have in some cases already begun.

Indeed, the political crisis and uncertainty at the central level, has given some Maoist sectors fertile grounds to recommence them. Dr. Baburam publicly stated that if the House Directives could not be implemented, they would form parallel government both horizontally and vertically with haste, that finally opens the ground of urban warfare or people’s agitation backed by the PLA leaving their cantonments. If such happened, the violent, non-violent and criminal groups would be fleeing to India for their secure terrain, effecting the security situation of India. The nation shall lose its opportunity to materialize the peace process through the people’s fresh mandate. At this instance, the nation and people in general would be defeated again and only the weapons traffickers, traders and manufacturers, opportunists and conformist leaders and pro-monarchial forces would benefit.

November 22, 2007 is the date set for the CA election. As the election could not be conducted on the scheduled date, the legitimacy of the IG, IP, constitution and peace accord have failed. Nepali Congress (NC) Mahesh Acharya says, “All three parties – the state, the Maoists and the UNMIN, involved in the ongoing peace process failed to play the desired role for effective implementation of the CPA.”

In this condition, there is a big question mark to zeal and zest of people for peace, security, development and forward-looking change, just as Professor Johan Galtung writes: “Where nothing has been solved the violence will recur, after some time.”

Nepal: First successful revolution of the century

Theo Russell

COMRADE C P Gujral, International Secretary of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), addressed a highly successful meeting in London last week organised by the Britain South Asian Solidarity Forum.Gujral gave a detailed analysis of the CPN(M)’s strategy as Nepal enters a decisive phase. The enemy, he said, was no longer the monarchy, but “US imperialism”.“Actually we are now fighting US imperialism. The fight against the monarchy is almost finished. Even if we achieve the Nepalese revolution, imperialism will not allow it to be sustained.”“Following last year’s mass uprising, an agreement was reached by the Seven Party Alliance (SPA), which included the UML (Communist Party of Nepal/United Marxist-Leninist), and the CPN(M), for an interim parliament and government to prepare elections for a new constituent assembly.“The US was opposed to this process as it contradicted the interests of US imperialism. When it was agreed that the CPN(M) would enter the interim parliament with 82 members, the US threatened to stop all assistance to Nepal.

“When the CPN(M) entered the interim government the US threatened to ask its allies to impose economic sanctions on Nepal. But the United States’ policy met with total failure.”Elections for a new parliament were set for June this year, but were postponed by the Election Commission for technical reasons, and since then they have been postponed again twice.Meanwhile arms and money have flowed into the southern Terrai region to promote ethnic conflict and violence.Gujral said the US had prepared two “ambushes” against the CPN(M). “The first was for the CPN(M) to lose the elections, and if it didn’t accept this, they, and any mass movement supporting them, would be declared as ‘terrorists’.

“The second was that if the CPN(M) won the elections, the US had prepared contras – the Terrais – and would claim that the elections were rigged by the CPN(M) and that these forces were fighting for ‘democracy’.“The CPN(M) saw these two threats to be trapped and killed, but the CPN(M) was also working out how to win the revolution.”In August the CPN(M) leadership adopted a strategy of a mass mobilisation, recognising a “serious mistake” was made in agreeing that only a new government could declare a republic, “when it should have been declared before the elections.”The Maoists “made a clear demand for a republic backed by a mass movement and decided to withdraw from the government and to refuse to participate in or allow the elections.”In September a CPN(M) motion to the interim parliament to declare a republic was carried with the UML’s support.“The CPN(M) is now saying they will oust the Nepali Congress from the government via a mass movement, and a new government should be formed,” Gujral said. “This would make the US very angry as it opposes any CPN(M) participation in the government.“The CPN(M) knows that if it becomes the head of the government the US will not tolerate this. Thus the CPN(M) has asked the UML to take power.

“US imperialism and Indian expansionism are opposed to this strategy, and would not tolerate a revolutionary government. So the next stage will definitely be very difficult.“The US is not interested in Nepal’s resources or in economic control, but is afraid of the worldwide impact of the revolution in Nepal. People are looking to the Nepali revolution, because it would set a precedent for revolution for the oppressed, exploited and struggling people of the world.“There is also a growing Maoist movement in India, and the Indian ruling class is very afraid of the success of the Nepali revolution and is ready to take any action.“So the situation is heading towards a climax. It is very difficult to predict what will happen in the next weeks or months. It is a life or death struggle we are working out in Nepal, and the situation is very serious, so at this time we think international support is very important.“We are preparing our people for the worst eventuality of foreign intervention.”

Gujral said Britain is supporting the peace process and there was an apparent diversion between British and US policy, and reported important developments in the CPN(M)’s relations with China.“The CPN(M) has established relations with China, and the Chinese embassy in Kathmandu has issued a statement saying that China would not tolerate any interference in Nepal, including by India.”This announcement followed “rigorous discussions” between a senior official of the Communist Party of China’s international department, Professor Wang. In an interview Wang said that if the US or India attempted to intervene in various ways in Nepal, China would not tolerate such actions if a certain limit was exceeded.Gujral concluded by saying: “We are confident that we will eventually see the success of the revolution in Nepal, the first successful people’s revolution of the 21st century.”

Source: London Communist, November 22, 2007

Maoist use of ethnic groups complicates Nepal's peace

Nov 21, 2007, 11:11 GMT

Kathmandu - The end of 11 years of a Maoist insurgency in Nepal has given rise to growing violence blamed on ethnic groups demanding a greater say in the country's political and economic decisions, often resulting in political losses for the former rebels.

Until recently, the ethnic groups had largely remained silent, but the Maoist insurgency brought them to the forefront.
'The Maoists systematically used ethnic groups that were largely ignored by the ruling elites by offering them a share of governance in areas they controlled during the insurgency,' said political analyst Sudhir Sharma, who closely followed the Maoist conflict. 'In exchange, the ethnic groups provided the rebels with manpower to fight government forces.'
But with the Maoists being bogged down in political intricacies in Kathmandu since they signed a peace agreement a year ago with the government, ethnic groups have gone ahead to pursue their own interests, aided by a lax security system across the country, Sharma said.

In the months since the signing of the November 21 peace deal, many of the Maoist-aligned ethnic groups have fallen out with the mother party and others have been in open confrontation with it.
The resulting political losses have virtually wiped out the Maoists' influence in many areas of southern Nepal, and with half of the country's 28 million people living on the plains there, the region dominated by ethnic Madhesi communities is extremely importantly in terms of votes.
The Maoists have tried to counter the loss of their political influence by labelling the ethnic groups in southern Nepal as being nothing more than criminal groups out to terrorize the people.
Such labels have raised amusement among political analysts who pointed out that many of the ethnic groups are carrying out exactly what they were taught by the Maoists.
The southern region has seen a proliferation of armed groups, strikes, demonstrations and violence. Weeks of protests and clashes at the beginning of the year left dozens dead.
'The Maoists feel ethnic groups, especially in southern Nepal, have taken up the cause they fought for and in the process have rendered them without an agenda for the people there,' political analyst Bipin Kharel said.
In September when Maoists decided to organize a roundtable conference' to build support for their demands for immediately abolishing the monarchy and reforming the electoral system, the ethnic groups decided to stay away, resulting in the shelving of the conference.
It was an embarrassment for the Maoists, who during their insurgency championed ethnic rights.

'They are nothing but a criminal group who have hijacked our agendas for ethnic groups,' Maoist leader Prachanda told reporters earlier this year, referring to the Madhesi People's Rights Forum, which was involved in the violent protests this year.
The demands raised by the group for proportional representation in the electoral system, according to the Maoists, is something they have campaign for all along.
In April, violent clashes between cadres of the two groups resulted in the deaths of 29 Maoist activists. It was the final nail in the coffin for Maoist influence in southern and south-eastern Nepal.
Since the peace deal, demands by dozens of ethnic groups have mushroomed across the country, including demands for autonomy, a federal structure of government and the right to self-determination.
The Maoist attempts to wrestle back influence appear to have made little impact and was possibly one of the reasons why they demanded full proportional representation in elections to chose an assembly to draw up a new constitution, political analysts said.
Their gamble backfired when coalition members rejected the demands, which led to the Maoists quitting the government in September and the indefinite postponement of the elections.
'Such conflicts during the interim period is natural and is the result of years of repression of these groups,' Lok Raj Baral, a political scientist, said, 'but the government must act either to address the problem or take action to find out if the groups really do have criminal ties.'
The resolution to the ethnic conflicts is necessary to ensure Nepal's peace process remains on track. Without resolving the problems, elections, a key part of Nepal's peace process, cannot take place and that could threaten stability in the country, analysts said.

Source: News Monster, November 21, 2007

Expanding UNSC: Integral Part Of UN Reform

Hira Bahadur Thapa

For years, the issue of reform ing the United Nations has been on the agenda before the General Assembly. Not surprisingly, the same item is being debated though with greater momentum at the current 62nd session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Following the submission of the report of the Security Council to the UNGA in recent weeks in New York, the international community's attention has again been drawn to the item of expanding the council. NegotiationsExpanding the UN Security Council has occupied a major part of the debates in the UN headquarters since 1994. The UN membership decided back in 1993 to establish an Open Ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on an Increase on the Council's Membership. That group has been working on this matter since January 1994. Despite 14 years of on-going negotiations among the UN members, no tangible results have been achieved on the subject.It has been the practice with the world body to consume plenty of time to come to a conclusion on an issue to which is attached great importance. Reform of the United Nations is something that concerns each and every member of the international organisation. There are 192 sovereign member states in the United Nations at the moment. Therefore, reaching a consensus on a subject like this is really a formidable job requiring perseverance and flexibility from the stakeholders. Reform itself is an issue that involves a comprehensive approach. It cannot be limited to certain areas because reform is intended to bring about changes in the working of the organisation. A reformed institution or an organisation should have its capacity enhanced so as to be able to deliver better results. With this reality very much under consideration, the entire membership of the United Nations has been engaged in fruitful negotiations for more than a decade to arrive at an acceptable formula. No doubt about the fact that the world body has gained some success in putting the reform plans in place. We have seen changes in the structure of the body in streamlining the functioning of the institution. Various departments have been amalgamated sometimes while new ones have been created to cope with the present realities. The UN has been frequently accused of employing a bloated bureaucracy. The member states have time and again stressed on the professional integrity and competence of its officials and staff members. In line with the directives given by its members, the UN has strived to reform to achieve higher efficiency in managing its manpower. It has simultaneously made sincere efforts to improve its image in terms of financial dealings. The example of bringing those financial culprits to book who were found guilty in cases related to the Oil for Food Programme in Iraq illustrates the UN's endeavours to curb corruption.No issue has become more contentious than the one concerning the expansion of the UN Security Council. It is clearly evidenced by the stretched negotiations among the members of the organisation. The question of reforming the Security Council is not confined to increasing its size. It includes the subject of improving the working methods also where, perhaps, the member states have lesser grievances to be addressed. In terms of conducting an open debate on issues of multilateral concern, like the recruitment of child soldiers, the Council has made some improvement. Its emphasis on greater transparency has been recognised as a positive step towards improving its working methods. It is equally important to note that the working methods of the Security Council are always inseparable from its composition. One without the other carries no significance.Looking at the long drawn out negotiations for almost a decade and a half, one can lose patience and observe that expansion of the size of the Council is a never materialising dream. This is certainly a negative picture of the efforts put in by the UN membership. It is because it took 18 years from 1945, the time of the UN's inception, till 1963 to increase the non-permanent membership of the Security Council. Initially there were 11 members - both permanent and non-permanent - and they rose to 15, following the UN Charter Amendment. Therefore, everyone should be aware of the complexity involved in the subject. It is not going to be an easy affair as there are many aspirants not only for non-permanent seats but also for permanent ones.It is in the category of permanent members where the members find it hard to crack the hard nut. Obviously, permanent membership is always sought after as it provides exclusive veto power. By using such a veto, they are in a position to block any resolution that they find objectionable to them. There is a dilemma as to whether they should limit the size of the reshaped Council or compromise on its effectiveness. All agree that the enlarged Council needs to be small to be quick and efficient and large enough to be effective and desirable. Some of the aspiring members have stated during the recent debate on the issue of Security Council reform that the Council's effectiveness will be compromised if changes are not made in its size. They have a point as the Security Council's present composition still represents the Cold War realities. It is high time that the members narrowed their differences and worked towards creating a constructive atmosphere to raise the bar of mutual trust.Here, it would be interesting to note down the recommendations contained in a new report prepared by the facilitators for Security Council reform who were tasked by the 61st GA President. That report seeks to focus on five major points for building on the progress achieved so far on the subject. These are, namely, categories of membership, the question of veto, question of regional representation, size of the enlarged council and the working methods of the council and the relationship between it and the General Assembly. Political structureVisible progress can be made only when the members are prepared to agree on these points and, thus, pave the way for intergovernmental negotiations. Since the expansion of the council in both categories is essential to get rid of the political structure that rested on the balance of power of the 1940s, Nepal has been favouring a position that fully takes this reality into account.

Source: The Rising Nepal, November 27, 2007

Rebuilding The State

The Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction has unveiled projects to accelerate the process of rebuilding infrastructure and assets destroyed during the conflict. The post-conflict reconstruction projects to be executed in three years include a larger gamut of schemes aimed at enhancing peace and reconciliation, institutional strengthening for democracy and promoting self-help enterprises to generate jobs for those affected by the conflict. The ministry has rightly come up with a package of schemes and programmes that are directed at reconstructing the Nepali state which was severely hit by the conflict during the past 10 years. The impact of the conflict was acute and multidimensional. In the decade-long conflict, physical infrastructure worth billions of rupees, including telecommunication towers, bridges, office buildings and historic monuments, was destroyed. More consequential and far-reaching damage was done to the state institutions at different levels. The elections to the national parliament and local bodies were halted because of the conflict. The national bureaucracy was hit and its capacity to function and deliver services was severely weakened and retarded. The destruction of the local government institutions, including village development committees, municipalities and district development committees, was severe, and this impeded the process for providing services to the people. The damage done to national institutions does have a long-term impact than the destruction caused to the physical assets and infrastructure. The post-conflict reconstruction design, presented on behalf of the government, has its focus on different areas, including rebuilding the hardware and software of the Nepali state. This should be appreciated. The government should accelerate the process of reconstruction and rehabilitation by mobilising both national and international resources. Since the international community is all willing to extend support in rebuilding the Nepali state, the political parties are under an obligation to create an environment so that resources can be mobilised to repair and rehabilitate infrastructure damaged and destroyed during the conflict. The priority should, therefore, go to maintaining and strengthening political stability by providing momentum to peace building and the democratisation process in the country. It is in this respect that the political stakeholders should demonstrate their commitment and fulfil the aspirations of the people with regard to peace and democracy.

Source: The Rising Nepal, November 27, 2007

Indian cops free pro- Maoist demonstrators after 27 hrs

NEW DELHI, Nov 20 - The Haryana state police in India Tuesday afternoon freed 18 members of the Maoist affiliated Jan Adhikar Surakshya Samiti (JASS), including its chief T. P. Pathak, who were arrested on Monday night.
When the JASS activists were staging sit-ins and corner meetings in different parts of India demanding the immediate implementation of the motions passed by Nepal’s interim parliament seeking an immediate arrangement for a republic and a fully proportional representation system for CA elections, they were arrested.
When the agitators were going for dinner after the meeting, they were arrested by the police who came from Jind of Haryana, said Chairman of Delhi committee of the JASS, K P Pun.
They were under the custody of Jind district police.
“(The Indian police said) you are Nepali Maoists. Why did you hold a meeting here and what did you plan in the meeting,” Pathak Kantipur after his release after almost 27-hour detention. “They have freed us after registering our details. They have said that we could be re-arrested any time.”
Pathak added that the Indian police even confiscated their cell phone sets.
He further said that one of the Indian police officer told them that they were arrested following an order from the “higher-up” authority.
The JASS has been organising various campaigns in different parts of India to press for the enforcement of the motions in Nepal.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, November 20, 2007

Extending UN Role in Nepal

The following is the Transcript of Question and Answer session with Ian Martin, Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Nepal in Kathmandu, 6 November 2007. At the end is Martin's press statement.

Sam Taylor, AFP: Mr Martin, it’s a bit difficult, I am still digesting your statement. When you talk about expanding of the mandate, first you talk about support to the implementation to the peace process. Can you explain in concrete terms what you mean about that support, what would that, could that be?

Ian Martin: There are a number of peace processes where there is implementation machinery defined which the United Nations participates in or supports. Indeed here in Nepal we were asked to be members of a broader advisory committee around the Peace Ministry. But many of the elements of agreements that have been reached, for example, the establishment of a high level monitoring committee, which we have always regarded as of great importance and were indeed asked in principle to assist; the establishment of a credible commission to investigate disappearances, which again has been repeatedly agreed but yet to be implemented in practice: these are among the kind of measures where I believe we could be of greater assistance to the parties in the follow-through on agreements that have been reached, sometimes more than once.

Sam Taylor, AFP: But how Mr. Martin – what form will that assistance take? Experts, UN people going in to assist or set up these things? What concrete things?

Ian Martin: Well, it could mean a continuing relationship with whatever body, the Peace Ministry or other implementation machinery that’s agreed, as well as indeed bringing in international experience where it is helpful to defining how to implement particular commitments.

Kumar Lamichhane Nepal 1 TV: Your statement mentions that “The expectation among Nepalese are high as to what UNMIN can do”. Are you indicating that Nepalese people are expecting much more of a role and mandate to be given to UNMIN, and are you indicating this thing in case the Terai rebel group which has also asked UNMIN to play role while negotiating with the Government?

Ian Martin: That reference wasn’t intended to be a reference to the Terai situation. It was rather a general reference to the fact that Nepalis see here what looks like a rather large United Nations presence and one that has increasingly reached the regions and, through our District Electoral Advisers and Arms Monitors, the districts of Nepal. They are very concerned about a peace process that they see faltering perhaps, in a number of respects. And they assume that it should be the role of the United Nations to help keep that process on track.

And we find ourselves having to explain to them, through you, that our role has essentially been asked to focus on arms monitoring, extremely important to sustaining the peace process but nonetheless only one aspect of it; electoral support, but it’s not the technical preparations for the election that has meant this further postponement; assistance in monitoring, but there what we have been able to do is being limited by the absence of an effective national monitoring of peace process commitments, such as was always intended. And, naturally, I think, many ordinary Nepalis who don’t understand the limitations of the mandate that was given to UNMIN expect that we should in some way be able to support the process more broadly.

Now I have stressed again that this will always remain a Nepalese process and any assistance the United Nations offers can only be at the request of the Government and the parties to the process. But we do think, without in any way envisaging a larger mission, that perhaps there are ways in which we could be more active in support to the process if that is desired.

Devendra Bhattarai, Kantipur: You have mentioned one thing here, “this would not mean a bigger UNMIN presence, we are already reducing our electoral staff”. But according to some of the sources most of the district electoral officers are being reinstated despite the fact that everybody is talking about downsizing UNMIN. Can I get the numbers of those electoral officers?

Ian Martin: We can give you the numbers afterwards. I can’t give them to you off the top of my head. But it is indeed true that, not wanting to cut back people’s quite limited contracts, many of which expire in December, we have temporarily re-deployed some of the staff who were here as District Electoral Advisers. So, the downsizing is in process. But it is not their re-deployment as District Electoral Advisers, that would be something to consider whatever the appropriate period was ahead of a new election date.

Sirish Pradhan, Press Trust of India: As you know the election has been postponed twice and it seems that the political parties are not serious in holding election in near future. How can you pressurize them to come to the electoral process? And there are reports that as the peace process becomes longer, the Maoist combatants in the camps are reducing. If it goes longer, there won’t be any Maoists in camp. How can you resolve this issue?

Ian Martin: First, I don’t think it’s the matter of the United Nations pressurizing the parties in relation to the election. I think it is the matter of the parties themselves, as I have suggested, frankly analysing what have been the reasons why the postponement took place, not just in terms of the new demands that produced the deadlock in the Parliament but also underlying reasons for the growing mistrust between the parties, and then to decide how those can be addressed in a way that allows the electoral process to go forward and addresses issues like public security which are critical for a successful electoral process.

So far as the cantonments are concerned, I don’t think you should exaggerate departures from the cantonments. It is true that our verification has shown that some of those who were there at the time of first registration are no longer in the cantonments, but the majority are. And I think it is extremely important that discharge from the cantonments is a managed process, with consideration of the future of those who leave the cantonments. That’s what we are working on so far as those who have been excluded by our process of verification. And then of course, as I have highlighted, there’s a longer-term question of the future of those who are verified and will remain in cantonments.

But what I have been stressing, and why it is so important to discuss the future of the security sector, is that cantonment was supposed to be a relatively short-term process while an early election was held. It has now gone on for 11 months. Similarly, the Nepal Army has been basically restricted to barracks for those 11 months. That is not a viable long term situation. And therefore there needs to be discussion, which so far has hardly begun, about the long term. And that’s a very central issue for UNMIN, because as I have said we don’t know how long the arms monitoring role at cantonments and barracks will need to continue unless we know that there is a plan for the long term solutions.

Sudeshna Sarkar, Indo Asian News Service: Mr Martin, would you care to name the armed group and leaders met by UN humanitarian officers, and are these UN humanitarian officials from UNMIN or from other UN offices?

Ian Martin: The statement was intended to make it very clear that they were not UNMIN personnel. We don’t have humanitarian personnel as such. But precisely because this was not an UNMIN responsibility I am not going to say anything more about the nature of the meeting. I have made it clear its general nature.

Sashi Pokharel, Ujayalo Radio: You have said that the UN has been suggested to be more active including in security sector as well. Does it mean you will give support to security forces? Supporting security forces?

Ian Martin: It is not so much a question of supporting security forces, as assisting a discussion as to what is the long-term future in the security sector. Now, if one goes back to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, it didn’t settle the future of the Maoist combatants or indeed all issues relating to the future of the Nepal Army. It said, on one hand, that there should be a special committee established by the Interim Government to consider the future of the Maoist combatants. That special committee was eventually established in May, it held a single meeting in July, and now with the Maoists out of the Interim Government, it is not continuing to work. So, essentially no progress has been made on that issue.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement also talked about the Interim Government drawing up an action plan for the Nepal Army for its democratisation, for considering its appropriate size, for considering its future inclusive character. And again, I am not aware that that discussion has been taken forward. Of course, these are difficult issues on which there are very different perspectives, but it’s not an issue that can be avoided because the future of those in the cantonments must be addressed.

Jane Rankin Reid, Tehelka: I am just wondering about the actual time frame for the extended mandate. I understand it is suppose to be mid-December. How much longer will UNMIN be looking for?

Ian Martin: The present mandate actually expires on 22 January. It is an initial 12 month mandate, voted by the Security Council on 23 January 2007. The question of the duration of any extension is a matter first for the Government, in the request it makes, and then for the Security Council. It’s not for UNMIN itself to determine. So, in that respect we will wait the request from the Government, which as I have said, the Prime Minister indicated is the subject of active consultation amongst the political parties at the moment.

Jane Rankin Reid, Tehelka: Assuming that Government requests your mandate, and it does not look like they are not going to, what is a ballpark timeframe?

Ian Martin: A Security Council mandate can be very different in different circumstances. Twelve months, which was our initial mandate, is normally the maximum that is decided. There was some suggestion when the initial mandate of UNMIN was discussed that six months would have been more appropriate initially and then a review, and that’s not uncommon in terms of United Nations operations, especially where the situation on the ground is uncertain and the Security Council wants to review it. But I would stress these are in a sense technical issues. The decision as to how long the mandate is extended doesn’t preclude further extension if that is requested.

Manesh Shrestha, CNN: You mention “where it has been suggested more UN involvement”: where does this suggestion come from? And, second, “there is no exit strategy for the UN without security sector reform”. What does that mean, exactly? Without security sector reform the UN will not be able to get out of Nepal?

Ian Martin: So far as the question of where suggestions come from, there have been a wide range of suggestions: from Nepalis, from people in political parties, people in civil society, as well as from those in the international community who wish the process well, who have made a significant investment, both by paying through the United Nations for UNMIN but also in many other ways, providing support to the election and so on. And naturally the international community wants to see that the investment in international support is actually effective and successful in furthering the process.

So far as the question of exit strategy is concerned, if you take the two core roles of UNMIN, so far as the electoral support is concerned, the exit strategy is clear: the holding of a successful election means there is no longer a continuing need for electoral support. Even now the amount that has already been accomplished, that will still be of value when a new date is set for the election, means that we wouldn’t necessarily expect to be asked for the same degree of support in future as we initially provided to the Election Commission. It’s much more complicated when you come to the arms monitoring role. Because that is linked to the arms monitoring agreement and to the fundamental commitment that began from the 12-Point Understanding that the Nepal Army would remain in barracks and the Maoist army would be in cantonments until the Constituent Assembly election had taken place. And even then there may be some further need for discussion and implementation of decisions about the future. So that’s why I link the question of discussions about the future of the security sector to UNMIN’s exit strategy.

There could be a decision that UNMIN was no longer to play the arms monitoring role, but then one would have to ask the question what does that mean in terms of respect for the commitments in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the arms monitoring agreement that have been implemented and are expected to continue until the Constituent Assembly election has taken place.

Mahesh, Kantipur Radio: You have mentioned in the statement there is a need for an “agreement on a road-map which will ensure that there is not yet another failure to hold the election on whatever new date is agreed.” Can you suggest what type of roadmap it could be?

Ian Martin: Again, I regard that as something that should be a subject of reflection amongst Nepalese actors, in which we will be delighted to contribute to. It is not for UNMIN to set out exclusively an UNMIN roadmap. But it clearly requires a sufficient degree of consensus around the electoral system, not only amongst the political parties but an understanding from the marginalised groups that they are to be adequately represented in the Constituent Assembly, and therefore that nobody has a motivation to continue to seek to disrupt the process. It requires, as I have already suggested, addressing the issues of public security which are particularly serious in parts of the Terai as we all know, but not only in the Terai. We don’t know exactly what would have happened if the political parties had gone forward to a 22 November election and had begun campaigning actively at the local level. But certainly up until the time the election was postponed, a climate had not yet been created in many parts of the country where all political parties could campaign freely, without any fear of intervention, of violence or threats of violence from others. And that’s fundamental, of course, to having a successful election.

But then beyond that, as I have suggested, the Constituent Assembly election is a key part of the peace process and there needs to be an understanding on all sides that that peace process is on track, and that’s where I come back to the suggestion and the very welcome reflection of that suggestion, on the part of the Prime Minister and others in the political parties, that a review of implementation of the Agreements is an important matter.

Ram Humagain, Gorkhapatra: I don’t see anything information about the second round of verification in the statement. Has it become sidelined due to other issues? What is the latest progress on the verification process?

Ian Martin: I primarily wanted to focus on the mandate issues that we have been discussing. But indeed I am happy to tell you that verification is proceeding with cooperation at Nawalparasi, the penultimate cantonment site where we are undertaking verification. And that once that is completed, we move on to the seventh and last site. Cooperation regarding the verification process itself is proceeding smoothly.

The big issue that remains, however, is arranging the discharge of those who have been excluded by verification and that, as many of you have heard me say before, requires the Government to take decisions on the payments that are to be made to those who are discharged. Because although three months of payments was released on the eve of Dasain, as it were, that was not regarded as the final fulfilment of commitments to make payments. Again, not a negotiation that UNMIN is involved in directly, but one that has to be successfully resolved by the Government and with the Maoists for us to be able to proceed with the discharge arrangements.

Ishwar Khanal, The Himalayan Times: You have said that UNMIN has met and will continue to meet the wide range of representatives from the traditionally marginalised groups. Does this mean that your discussions are purely confined to humanitarian issues or, like, political issues as well?

Ian Martin: These are discussions to inform how UNMIN carries out all of its work. Obviously a lot of the concerns that marginalized groups have expressed to us relate to their position within the electoral system and eventually in the Constituent Assembly. Humanitarian issues are dealt with by the UN humanitarian system, the Humanitarian Coordinator, Mr. Kahane and others. Human rights issues are of course primarily within the mandate of OHCHR, which similarly has an active engagement with representatives of these groups. But we regularly discuss, sometimes at our initiative, sometimes at theirs, with representatives of women’s groups about the inclusion of women in the peace process and the electoral system, and then of course with Madhesi, Janajati, Dalit and other groups. And I think that it is extremely important that UNMIN and the United Nations system as a whole should be open to and aware of their concerns, even if some of them are not matters that are for UNMIN to address directly.

Surendra Phuyal, BBC: We’ve been hearing and reading reports that UNMIN is giving too much concession to the Maoists, which was evident while doing the revision of those disqualified during the verification process. We also hear, at the same time, from the Maoists that UNMIN is conspiring against them. What is the reality? How do you see these reports?

Ian Martin: The reality from my perspective is that UNMIN is trying as hard as it can to be objective in a situation where there are accusations and counter-accusations, and naturally nobody is going to be fully satisfied that we are reflecting exclusively their point of view.

Let me deal specifically with the question about verification and whether there are concessions within verification. Because this, I think, mainly stems from the disagreements we had with the Maoists after verification at the first cantonment site in Ilam, when we did agree to review a small number of cases. We reviewed a small number of cases chosen by General Wilhelmsen, the Chief Arms Monitor, because he was not satisfied that the reports from the teams could be fully relied on. They were reviewed according to exactly the same criteria. Some of the decisions were maintained, some were reversed, and we then built in a process whereby cases could be taken up to a higher level. We are carrying out a very difficult process, because we are trying to confirm through interview issues of age and recruitment dates that can’t be confirmed with absolute certainty by any documentation. But I assure you and everyone again that we have not compromised in any way the criteria that were set out in the arms monitoring agreement.

Now you will continue to find that sometimes things we say will coincide with the perspective of the Nepali Congress, sometimes with the perspective of the UML, sometimes with the perspective of the Maoists. And our criticisms will sometimes be directed in one direction and sometimes in the other, and I would ask you to look overall in the manner in which we are trying to fulfil the role of an objective third party. Because frankly it is only with objectivity and trust from all parties that support to a peace process can be effective. It can’t be effective by the third party becoming purely a critic of one party or another.

Biswomani Pokharel, Samay: Mr Martin, I think you are aware of the fact that Prime Minister Koirala, the Maoists and China and India are not willing to give you the extended role. In this context, why are you coming with all these agendas demanding the extension. Are you trying to put pressure on the government and all these parties?

Ian Martin: I’m not really aware of anyone’s position unless it is communicated to me. I read a lot of things in the media, some of which I think may be correct, some of which I’m not sure are correct. But until I’ve had official discussions with those involved I don’t know formally what the position is.

I am responding to the view that the United Nations ought to be able to play a more fully effective and supportive role in this peace process without in any way compromising national sovereignty and the fact that it is a Nepalese process. At the end of the day, what UNMIN will do will be determined by the requests of the Government and the parties, and the willingness, of course of the Security Council to mandate us according to their request.

HH Upadhyay, Kantipur TV: In your statement it says “the need for reviewing the CPA” and you have blamed both the parties for violating the CPA. Can you please tell me who is more violating the CPA? Do you see any defect in the CPA itself?

Ian Martin: I don’t think it is helpful to try to ask the question who is violating the CPA most. Because certainly failures to implement the CPA are very different in their nature and some of them frankly are a matter of shared responsibility, especially when implementation was the responsibility of an Interim Government that included the Maoists, both sides to the peace agreement. So I think what’s needed is for everybody to look at what the limitations have been in the implementation of the peace agreements. And it would be more helpful is if each side focused on their own limitations rather than on accusations against the other. The further part of your question?

HH Upadhyay, Kantipur TV: Do you see any defects in the CPA?

Ian Martin: Many of the issues that concern us are questions of implementation, but some are issues where the CPA itself did not fully map out the future. For example, if we return to the question of the future of the Maoist combatants, as I already said the CPA described a process in general terms but it certainly did not settle the issue. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement was not a final resolution of all the issues of the peace process. It was a very major achievement in taking the peace process forward but there is still a need to take forward further aspects of the peace process. And the CPA was also negotiated at a time when issues of inclusion were not as prominent as they have become. So again, although there are general commitments to questions of inclusion, those too I think need further consideration in the current situation.

Gopal Sharma, Reuters: Some Indian channels have quoted you as saying “significant numbers in the Maoist soldiers in the camps are children”. What is the latest numbers? Can you give us some figures?

Ian Martin: There is nothing new, I have said in these press conferences that we have confirmed through our verification that there are a significant number of minors, that’s not new. And that continues to be something that we are determining through our verification, what exactly the numbers are. As you know, I am not in the habit of giving you those numbers, but I have always been clear that we have found significant numbers who are under 18 on the qualifying date. And we are concerned to move ahead to their discharge, which under the agreement ought to have been immediate but which has been delayed by the failure to reach an agreement on the issue of payments in particular.

Ghanashyam Ojha, The Kathmandu Post: As regional forces have an influence on the peace process, do you think Nepal has to discuss with India to extend the tenure of UNMIN?

Ian Martin: That’s a matter for the Government of Nepal to decide,

Ghanashyam Ojha, The Kathmandu Post: What to you feel?

Ian Martin: It’s not a question of what I feel. What the Security Council expects is a request from an independent sovereign government. What views the Government takes into account in making its requests, are a matter for the Government.

Kumar Lamichhane, Nepal 1 TV: Fully effective role of UNMIN. Does that mean in your role, you are looking for expansion of the mandate that was earlier given to you? My second question is, are you in favour of merging Maoists combatants in the Nepal Army prior to the election?

Ian Martin: Well again, let me do the last question first: it’s not for me to be for or against the merger of Maoist combatants before or after the election. That is a matter that has to be decided by the parties. It is for me to insist that is a crucial issue - the future of the Maoists combatants is a crucial issue for the reasons that I have already said. Because there is no other way in which our arms monitoring responsibilities are going to transition to longer term solutions. What those longer term solutions are not for the UN to prescribe. They are indeed to be negotiated. Of course there is international experience that can be made available to those considering the issues that may be helpful, but not in the spirit of saying what should be done in Nepal should be done the same way as has been done in any other particular country.
As so often, when you ask two questions, I forget the other one.

Kumar Lamichhane, Nepal 1 TV: The fully effective role of UNMIN?

Ian Martin: Does it mean a formal expansion of the mandate? The three examples that I gave, of where we think we could be more helpful, I don’t think would necessarily require a formal expansion of the mandate of UNMIN. We are a United Nations political mission; I am the Special Representative of the Secretary-General who has what in United Nations terms is normally called a “Good Offices” role, an ability to offer assistance where that is requested. Those are areas in which I think we could very well assist largely within our existing mandate and resources if there is a clear wish for us to do so.

Sirish Pradhan, Press Trust of India: Last question. When you say extended mandate does it mean peacekeeping forces as the political situation becomes more fragile due to the postponement of the election.

Ian Martin: Nobody, nobody, nobody is talking about peacekeeping forces coming to Nepal. And I should point out to you some ambiguity in the words we are using. When I use the word “extended”, I am talking about extended in time. Others have been using the word “expanded” in relation to the scope of the mandate. But please be clear, I have just been in New York, there is no discussion in New York of peacekeeping in relation to Nepal. This is a special political mission and what is under discussion is the future term and role of this political mission.

HH Upadhyay, Kantipur TV: When you were in New York, the newspaper reported that someone telephoned you and asked some money, threatened you. Is it true?

Ian Martin: It’s true that there were telephone threats made here to this office, not received by me personally. And that an arrest was carried out as a result of that. A lot of the details in the report were not correct, including the report that someone had spoken directly to me. But it is correct that there were threats made.

HH Upadhyay, Kantipur TV: What is happening to the case? Is that case in the police?

Ian Martin: The police – it is now in the hands of the police. Yes. It is obviously not for UNMIN, it is a matter for the police.

Sudeshna Sarkar, Indo Asian News Service: Just wondering Mr. Martin, when this mandate is extended, from Special Representative, are you going to become and Extra-Special Representative?

Ian Martin: I think, I can, without any doubt deny that. Let me just wrap up by emphasizing, if I may, a few of the points that I wanted to make. The first, I wanted to emphasize my main message from New York that there is still very strong commitment on the part of United Nations, both the Secretary-General and the Security Council, to supporting Nepal’s peace process. So, that’s true at the highest level.

Secondly, the challenges to the process really must not be under estimated. There is a need for a frank assessment of why the two dates for the Constituent Assembly election have come and gone, and what now is a realistic roadmap. Thirdly, we have had a lot of discussion about in areas in which UNMIN is ready and could be of assistance to the process, but again I emphasize that that is not in any way to take away from the fact that this is a Nepali process, and that it is for the Nepalis to decide what role it wants the United Nations and the international community as a whole to play in support of it. Thank you very much indeed.

########

PRESS STATEMENT of Ian Martin (6 November 2007)
My main purpose in inviting you to this press briefing is to answer any questions you may have about the future of UNMIN’s mandate, about which there have been many media reports and comments during my trip to New York. But first I want to refer to the negotiations of recent weeks which culminated in the votes in the Interim Legislature-Parliament on Sunday. The future of the monarchy is obviously not a matter on which the United Nations has taken or should take a position; nor is the electoral system, except for the desirability of respecting international good practice which is compatible with different electoral systems. These are matters for Nepalis to decide. Although these two issues have not been fully resolved, there have been positive aspects of recent discussions among the parties: the seriousness of the efforts to reach compromise within the Seven-Party Alliance; the repeatedly-expressed commitments to sustaining the Alliance and the peace process; and the respectful spirit in which the final parliamentary proceedings were conducted, despite continuing substantive disagreements.
I am dismayed however to have returned to an increased number of reports of unresolved abductions and killings, whether attributed to armed Madhesi groups, Maoist cadres, or local disputes. Nepal has lived for too long with violence and intimidation, and I appeal again at this season for a commitment to tolerance and non-violence, but also for an end to impunity. It is the responsibility of all to support efforts to bring murderers to justice, as the CPN(M) has committed to do in the tragic case of Birendra Sah, and as I have repeatedly said should be the case with the killers of Maoist cadres in the Terai. The rule of law across all of Nepal is fundamental to a conducive atmosphere for free and fair elections as well as to broader public confidence in the peace process as a whole.
When I briefed the Security Council in New York, I said that the crisis facing the peace process was not just the consequence of new demands regarding the issues of monarchy and the electoral system, but that it also stemmed from growing distrust amongst the parties to the peace agreement, with accusations in both directions that commitments had not been implemented. I believe that the parties need to take stock of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and other agreements reached, and their implementation. This should include the implementation of commitments made to Janajati, Madhesi and other groups. I was encouraged to be told in my meeting with the Prime Minister just before leaving Kathmandu that he intended that there should indeed be a review of the implementation of agreements, and to find on my return a wide appreciation of this need.
I also said to the Security Council that the parties need to collectively reaffirm to the public their commitment to a successful Constituent Assembly election, in order to reassure the people of Nepal that the process remains on track. The Constituent Assembly election is an integral element of the peace process: a credible election cannot take place unless the peace process is on a solid footing, and a credible election is critical to the success of the peace process. This requires not just the setting of a date, but agreement on a road-map which will ensure that there is not yet another failure to hold the election on whatever new date is agreed. Despite the best efforts of the Election Commission, with which UNMIN has worked closely, two dates set for the election have come and gone. It is now time for a frank analysis by Nepali politicians and civil society of why this has been the case, and what are the requirements for a successful electoral process to go forward.
I also informed the Security Council that the Prime Minister had told me of his intention to consult other parties with a view to requesting an extension of the mandate of UNMIN. The mood of the Security Council appeared to be unanimously sympathetic to such a request. As well as extending the time period of the mandate of UNMIN, there has also been discussion regarding the scope of our support to the peace process.
Let me first put to rest the suggestion that UNMIN has already exceeded its mandate. This is not the case. I want in particular to put on record that UNMIN has not met or sought to meet with the leadership of armed Madhesi groups. This misunderstanding appears to have arisen because there was one meeting in India between United Nations humanitarian officials and the leadership of one armed group. Their purpose was to try to ensure that emergency food relief and other assistance could be delivered in the wake of flooding in the Terai earlier this year without attacks by armed groups against humanitarian workers. These UN officials involved were not under the authority of UNMIN, and their discussion was confined to humanitarian, not political issues. Of course UNMIN has met and will continue to meet with a wide range of representatives of traditionally marginalized groups.
I was frank with the Security Council, as was the Secretary-General in his report, that expectations among Nepalis are high as to what UNMIN can do. Our focused mandate is not well understood. To expect UNMIN to safeguard or advance the peace process in ways that it has not been mandated or requested to assist is not realistic. I have always emphasized that this is a Nepalese process, whose success depends on Nepalis: the international community can only assist in the manner in which its support is requested. There are a number of areas where it has been suggested that more active United Nations support to the peace process would be of value, if desired by the government and the parties. I mention three. First, support to the implementation of the peace process and agreements reached, which as I have already said Nepali political leaders and civil society are increasingly acknowledging needs to be addressed. Second, assisting a discussion on the future of the country’s security sector, including a managed transition from the current temporary Maoist army cantonments and restriction to barracks of the Nepal Army to long-term solutions: without this, there is no exit strategy from UNMIN’s arms monitoring. And third, greater advisory support to promoting public security – the greatest concern of so many Nepalis and a critical requirement for a credible Constituent Assembly election. These would not mean a bigger UNMIN presence: we are already reducing our electoral staff, although we will be ready to increase our district presence again if requested ahead of a firm election date. But it could mean providing the broader support to the success of the peace process that many Nepalis expect of the United Nations. is for Nepalis to decide what is asked of the United Nations: you have the assurance of the Secretary-General and, I believe, the openness of the Security Council to extend the assistance requested.

Maoists want cases dropped

KATHMANDU, Nov 6 - The Maoists have sought the judiciary's commitment that it will not proceed with cases filed during conflict time against its cadres as a precondition for releasing two court staffers of Rukum district.
President of Maoist-affiliated government employees' organization, Rukma Lamichhane, communicated the intention behind the abduction of Sashi Ram Bista and Khadga Bahadur Khadka, employees of Rukum District Court, to the Supreme Court administration and representative of apex court employees' organization on Tuesday.
"They sought the judiciary's commitment that it would not go ahead with cases against their cadres in return for the release of Bista and Khadka," Hemanta Rawal, co-spokesperson of the Supreme Court, told the Post.
Lamichhane met Rawal at the apex court to convey the Maoist condition for the release of abducted court employees Tuesday afternoon. Bista and Khadka were abducted in the weekend while they were on duty to serve a court subpoena in a murder case involving what Maoists called a "martyr family".
Similarly, Lamichhane also conveyed a similar message to Binod Adhikari, chairman of Nepal Judiciary Employees Concern Committee, in a telephonic conversation Tuesday when I questioned the abduction.
"If they want to get their cases withdrawn why don't they send Prachanda to meet the Chief Justice and continue to make helpless court employees suffer through abduction," Adhikari said.
A few hours after the Maoists revealed their intention, they released Bista and Khadka in Rukum district on the same condition that Lamichhane conveyed to the apex court in Kathmandu.
"They have been released this evening on the condition that initiatives will be taken at the center to withdraw cases against Maoist cadres, and that the court would not proceed with cases till the center decides on them," Ravi Raj Kafle, chief district officer of Rukum told the Post over phone from Rukum.
In Kathmandu, Lamichhane said he met the official of the Supreme Court administration to try to understand the root cause behind the abduction instead of disseminating news of the abduction unilaterally.
"The court sent them (the abducted staffs) with bad intention, violating the commitment in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement," Lamichhane said.
In the meantime, Nepal Judiciary Employees' Concern Committee in Kathmandu District Court did not work for two hours Wednesday to protest the abduction.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, November 6, 2007

Maoists to pressure govt on republic, poll system

KATHMANDU, Nov 6 - The CPN-Maoist has announced new programs to pressure the government to implement parliamentary directives on republic and proportional electoral system. An informal central committee meeting of the party, held at its central office at Budhanagar Tuesday, decided to initiate interactions with various ethnic groups, besides calling a mass meeting in Kathmandu on November 18 in this connection.
"We will talk to various political parties for an immediate meeting of the seven political parties," Maoist central leader Barsa Man Pun 'Ananta' said.
He said the Maoists would urge all political parties during the seven-party meeting to sincerely implement the parliamentary directives on republic and proportional electoral system.
"We will also initiate interaction with various ethnic groups, which are in favor of a republic and a proportional electoral system, to forge a strong voice in this regard," he said.
The Maoist central committee meeting also decided to launch nation-wide protests if the government fails to implement the parliamentary directives.
"The Nepali Congress must accept the majority verdict of parliament," said Maoist spokesperson Krishna Bahadur Mahara. He also said the NC would face moral pressure against continuing in the government if it ignored parliament's verdict. "The situation will come to a point when we will have to think of an alternative to the Nepali Congress in the government if the NC fails to implement parliament's verdict," he said.
The meeting has decided to organize a mass meeting in Kathmandu on November 18 to pressure the government to implement parliament's directives.
Maoist leader Ananta said the Maoists have achieved a victory over their issues through parliament. "The Nepali Congress now has no option but to accept parliament's verdict," he said.
Focus on unity, poll: UML to Maoists
KATHMANDU, Nov 6 (PR) - The CPN-UML has suggested to the Maoists to focus on seven-party unity and holding CA polls at the earliest and not get distracted by other issues.
Talking to Maoist Chairman Prachanda and his deputy Babu Ram Bhattarai at his residence, UML General Secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal urged the Maoist Chairman to focus on holding the constituent assembly (CA) polls at the earliest while keeping the seven-party alliance (SPA) intact, instead of raising other issues.
They (Maoists) raised the issue of fulfilling their 22-point demand (submitted to the government earlier) and the proposals passed by the interim parliament, but Nepal told the Maoist leaders that those issues could be discussed during the seven-party meeting, and urged them to focus on holding the CA poll. "Nepal emphasized CA polls at the earliest without creating any division within the SPA," said Raghuji Pant, UML leader.
Nepal told the Maoist leadership that even the proposals passed by the special session of the interim parliament need to be ratified by a two-third majority of the House.
"It is not possible without the consent of the Nepali Congress (NC)," Pant said, adding, "Therefore, unity among the seven parties is a must and that is also the spirit of the interim constitution."
Clarifying the UML stance over the latest political scenario, Pant further said, "We believe that neither the UML and the Maoists jointly nor the Nepali Congress acting alone can provide a way out of the current political stalemate." He also ruled out any change in the government leadership. "The party has not thought over the issue of changing the government leadership so far," Pant said, speaking at a program held in the capital on Tuesday.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, November 6, 2007

Maoists not likely to join govt: Vaidya

Kathmandu, Nov. 6: Senior leader of the CPN-Maoist Mohan Vaidya 'Kiran' has claimed that the leftist force has to lead the seven party alliance and move ahead accordingly in order to end the present political deadlock. Talking to The Rising Nepal, Maoist leader Vaidya said that the special session of interim parliament has brought the leftist forces closer and mounted moral pressure on the leadership of the present government. ?The special session of parliament has passed the motions on republic and proportionate representation system for the constituent assembly," he said adding that the onus now lies on the government to sincerely implement the decision of the House. He warned that the government would eventually collapse if it ignored the sentiment of the House and failed to implement the instructions on these vital national issues. The endorsement of the motions for declaring republic and adopting fully proportional electoral system is against the authoritarian tendency of the Nepali Congress and it clearly calls for genuine democratic practice in the functioning of the government, he said. ?The decision is of vital importance as it has underscored the urgency of institutionalising the republican setup and fully proportional election system by amending the interim constitution, which reflects the aspirations of the people," the senior Maoist leader claimed. According to him, the government is now under the obligation to present a bill in the parliament and act accordingly to ensure that the House decisions are implemented. ?For this, our activities should be focused to help the government carry out the House instructions and hold the CA election as early as possible."Asked how the Maoist party would move ahead to implement the House decision, Vaidya said that the government was already facing a moral question regarding the recent House decision. ?Our efforts would be to exert pressure on the government in a peaceful manner to act in line with the spirit of the House motions on the republican setup and proportional representation system."?It is up to the Nepali Congress whether or not to move ahead as per the democratic norms and practices. If the government does not follow the parliament's instructions, it will lose its credibility and will also lose the right to rule.Regarding the provision in the interim constitution for implementing the adopted proposals he said, ?the constitutional provision of the two third majority for adopting the motion on monarchy is a technical one. Moreover they are related with the CA election and the majority lawmakers have passed the motions. They are of political importance. Now we have to see whether the Congress wants the election or not. It depends on how the government responds to parliament's instructions. If the government ignores or makes unnecessary delay to implement them, we will start people's movement. Therefore, the government should act accordingly or else invite its eventual collapse."He clarified that the party would not join the government even after the government implements the instructions. ?The condition for us to join the government is the end of the authoritarian attitude of the Congress and creation of environment for the genuine practice of lokatantra in which the government operates on consensus," he said.Denying rift in the seven-party alliance because of the division in parliament during the voting, he claimed the voting in parliament has created a new basis for alliance among seven parties. This unity must be strengthened to institutionalise a republican set up in the country.?Maintaining the alliance is the need of the hour as it has not achieved its goal of holding CA election and thereby ensuring restructuring of the state. This mission was set when the seven parties and our party reached the 12-point understanding two years ago," he added.Vaidhya termed the leftist unity seen in the voting as the victory of the Nepali people and against the hegemonistic attitude of some partners in the alliance. ?The left unity should not undermine the SPA or alienate the Congress, but it should rather be used to strengthen the alliance to foil the conspiracy of reactionary and imperialist forces. As the leftist force is a progressive force, it has the responsibility to work for a free and fair CA election and the leftist have to reorient their activities towards the free and fair election."At the same time, the Maoist leader warned of fresh agitation if the government ignored the other demands of the Maoists. ?The issues concerning the whereabouts of the disappeared people, providing relief to the family of the martyrs, facilities and salary to the Maoist combatants are humanitarian issues, which must be addressed with priority. How can we go for polls without addressing these issues?" he said.

Source: The Rising Nepal, November 7, 2007

House Decision

THE special session of the parliament reached a majority decision in which it concurred on a federal democratic republic ahead of the Constituent Assembly elections and a fully proportional election system. The special session saw intense deliberations for a protracted period amongst the leaders of the political parties and the parliamentarians. That this decision was reached augurs well for the peace and democratic process of the country that at one time looked like floundering, much to the chagrin of the people at large who had made great sacrifices.

At one time, it was feared that the Seven Party Alliance was on the verge of breaking up as the negotiations were taking place, but finally reason prevailed, and the alliance remained intact. Unity amongst the political parties is crucial at this time, especially at a time when efforts are underway to hold the Constituent Assembly elections. This has now opened the way for declaring the date for the Constituent Assembly elections that would decide the future course the country would take. Due to adverse circumstances, the elections had to be postponed twice. This had drawn not only widespread anxiety in the country, but also of the international community that wanted to see the successful culmination of the peace and democratic process.

However, what is to be noted is that the parliament had failed to garner the required two-third majority to immediately declare the country a republic by changing the interim constitution. The decision reached by the House comes at a time when it is being questioned if the Constituent Assembly elections can be held in a free and fair manner without fear and intimidation of the voters. There are regressive elements that are bent on creating an environment that is not congenial for the holding of the elections. Such attempts should be thwarted and the disgruntled elements, some of whom have genuine grievances, should come to the negotiating table to sort out matters so that the important exercise of holding the Constituent Assembly elections can be brought to fruition.

In any case, the House decision should be hailed by all accounts as there was giving and taking on key issues in the proposals, whereby the Maoists withdrew its motion for the immediate declaration of a republic and the consequent UML support for a fully proportional electoral system. Now that various issues that served as impediments for the successful holding of the Constituent Assembly polls have been thrashed out, the country looks forward to the continuation of the democratic exercise with the hope that the peace achieved in the country will be lasting.

Source: The Rising Nepal, November 7, 2007

Interview with Maoist leader Ram Bahadur Thapa in Nepal

“I stand with the revolution”
28 October

MIN BAJRACHARYA

By raising demands on the eve of the constituent assembly elections, the Maoists are accused of being against polls. Why are you going against the very agenda you raised? On a superficial level, it looks like the CPN-M was behind the delay in elections. But if you take a closer look, you’ll see that the NC and other parties are the main culprits. Take a look at our demands, and see if they are legitimate or not. The parties are responsible for the election postponement because they refused to budge. Don’t you see that you are endangering the peace process and a return to war? We have seen that danger. If the government tries to suppress our peaceful revolution with weapons then it will be clear that they have no desire to hold elections or change to a republic. I don’t think they’ll make such a stupid move. But history has shown that in extreme cases, people do resort to stupidity. So we haven’t dismissed that possibility. In the span of one-and-a-half years, what have you accomplished and what have you lost? Our recently concluded fifth plenum answers this question. There were forces that tried to isolate us by labelling us terrorists. They have failed. The middle class no longer misunderstands us and we have established international relations. But there have also been losses. We have had trouble making the changes we wanted. We failed to make the people understand many of our agreements. Regressive forces have made use of that. Our weaknesses in madhesi, janjati and republican issues have been exposed.

Are you a hardliner? No. There are right-wingers, middle-of-the- roaders, and leftist factions in our own party and they are in constant conflict. So where do you stand among those factions? We are revolutionaries and I fall into that category. Our party follows the revolutionary code. I am on the side of revolution and if the party line goes against my beliefs, then I will stand with the revolution. It is said that you have tried to establish yourself against Chairman Prachanda. That is also part of a conspiracy. I do not surface in public much, and that is my weakness. This rumour has spread because certain factions wish it. You have said that you do not want a republic like that in Iraq or Sikkim. We want a Nepali republic, where Nepalis make the decisions. Foreign help will be required, but not foreign direction. If foreigners try to direct us instead of just helping us, it will be an attack on our national integrity. You have maintained that there is an Indian hand in everything, but we do not see you opposing it. Our line on India is clear. There are many treaties and agreements with Nepal that need to be changed. We don’t want to ruin our relationship with India, we want to make it better in the future. But our party will oppose India’s incorrect actions. Certain factions in India are hatching a conspiracy against the movement of the Nepali people. This is an attack on our independence. The madhesi incidents are also anti-national.

Source: People's March, November 1, 2007