The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of Nepal was unable to envisage the future political discourse and its implications. Instead, it was signed as a mere political commitment to hold the election for the Constituent Assembly, declare Nepal a republican state and federalize its political division. The local and national contradictions between the people on various aspects, political behavior of the past and new strategy of dealing with the historical discriminatory patterns were hardly discussed and incorporated. Similarly, the agreement was signed at a time when doctrinal differences of the parties had been momentarily dormant for the sake of peace in the country. However, the stakeholders of the agreement were heedless that a time would come following the signing of the agreement whereby political parties had to move ahead with their own political ideologies.
In the beginning of the discourse it seemed like both the conflicting parties took the matters easily. This made the election for the Constituent Assembly and formation of government possible. However, as the time passed by, the political parties in the country ceased to show the spirit of peace agreement. Prevailing socio-economic structure and gradual reformation was not in the agenda. Socio-economic transformation and strategies for the purpose were not planned at all. Stakeholders did not take such issues into context in order for them to arrive at an accurate resolution of the problems. Everything was left to the mercy of the new Constituent Assembly alone, as if formation of the assembly was the panacea. The parties failed to understand at the time of signing the agreement that direct hostility or unexpressed hostile relation of the warring period could be manifested in a different form even after the peace process so provisions to manage such problems needed to be translated into practice. The behavioral aspect was neglected and the need of adjustment was hardly thought of.
After introduction of loktantra, there has increased antagonism and distrust among the political parties and such a situation has channeled down to the local level. For better or worse, the parties especially the Maoists are at the helm of crisis. They are getting into deeper crisis due to internal problems. Inter-party contradictions have reached an extreme point. Multi-tendencies have emerged in the party due to power politics. However, the party has continued its efforts to dwarf all other political schools of thoughts. The Maoists are in confusion. The issues like how to convince their cadres for a U turn policy of changing the society and the state peacefully and how to get rid of the Barack and Army culture, which is deeply rooted in the mindset of the cadres are the major problems for them. The cadres whose sacrifice brought the party to the current height of recognition and politics have also been the problem for them now. Unfortunately, all these realities have hampered, if not risked, peace process and have dealt the conflict-victims and their families unjustly.
Despite the fact that Local Peace Committees (LPCs) are constituted in almost all the districts, being guided by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, it is not sure whether or not such committees will be able to create foundation for the establishment of the TRC, supposed to be formed. The LPCs are more a politically balancing forum than finding common understanding on identifying the root causes of and preparing concrete plan for conflict resolution. People have understood this reality well. As a common forum for interaction and sharing, these Committees will and have to be the door to enter into the reconciliation process at the later stage when Truth and Reconciliation Commission is established.
The leaders and actors assigned to drive the LPCs are not aware of the role and philosophy of reconciliation well. For the conflicting parties, its been a mechanism to facilitate the issues out of courts proceedings. Quite often they expect their cadres have to be given immunity. Moreover, the LPCs have tended to handle development projects deviating from their principles and principal roles.
The LPCs were established with a view to create foundation for TRC. However, views have also been heard that LPCs are synonymous to the TRC. The LPCs can never be tantamount to the TRC but the former can play complementary roles for the establishment and success of the TRC.
Perpetrators and victims are divided on the party line. Forging trust and congenial relationship between all LPC members and victims is the challenge now although many coordinators of the LPCs have been viewing that there has been a conducive environment at the community level for lasting peace and reconciliation.
Politically and constitutionally, there has reached an agreement among the stakeholders in the country for the formation of TRC. However, one should be clear- the TRC does not and cannot replace the judicial process; rather, it complements the latter assuring that criminals of the conflicting era will not enjoy immunity. The TRC also establishes foundation for reconciliation and gives pardon, if needed and consensus built.
Creating understanding, realizing the crimes committed in the past and being ready to forgive will create a better reconciling environment at the local level. This is possible only when the political and social infrastructures are ready. Most important factor is structured plan of reparation which includes the reliable guarantee of non-repetition of atrocities of the past. However, people doubt sometimes that the TRC will be constituted. We have political and constitutional agreement and assurance. So, sooner or later, the state will be bound to establish it. This is the situation now that both the warring parties are dilly-dallying because they are reluctant to establish such a commission. They are doing so also to enjoy immunity. Being the formulators of law, the leaders have tendency to remain above the law. This has been another cause of delay.
The TRC can create foundation for reconciliation through political, individual and social level of dialogues. It can give knowledge to the development works to address aspiration of the local people. But, investigation, prosecution and adjudication cannot be replaced by TRC. The document of reconciliation prepared by TRC can be an instrument to repeal charges against perpetrators. However, annulation should take place only after applying the judicial values properly. Once the TRC is established and it starts operating, things have to be accomplished as desired by the conflict victims, their families and the civil society. This is because we the advocate of human rights and justice are fully aware of the fact that the international obligation does not allow immunity to the criminals of serious crimes, crime against humanity, genocide, war crimes and the torture perpetrated against anyone who is not involved in war directly.