Nepal’s review under the the UPR is impending. Report preparatory phase has been over and Civil Society and the stakeholders have already submitted their reports to the HRC. In this context, INFORMAL had talked with the concerned responsible persons and the convener regarding the report preparatory process, the issues raised in the reports, the recommendations following the review and the implementation aspect. Edited version of the interview:
How important, do you think, is the review with reference to Nepal?
Considering the grave situation of impunity in the country and the derogation of the past political commitments made by the political leaders regarding the peace process and the rule of law, I firmly believe that the counter report prepared by a large coalition of more than 235 NGOs for the UPR shall create an international concern towards Nepal paving a better way for the solution of current political impasse which the Nepalis have been the victim of. To be a party to different international human rights instruments and covenants is one thing and to be appraised and to receive necessary recommendations for the better human rights situation in the country is equally important. The Government of Nepal has to do what is necessary following the review to ameliorate the human rights situation in the country. For me, the essence of the review of Nepal under the UPR lies in the conviction that the review will make the government of Nepal initiate better steps for the improvement of the rights situation in the country.
Do you think the grassroots people are well-informed about the concept, process and importance of the review?
People at the grassroots level were consulted by the local Human Rights Defenders representing different movements and organizations through dialogues. Nepal NGO Coalition for the UPR being itself a network of the NGOs ranging down to the local level, it had been easier for us to hold interactions, consultations and disseminate information on the UPR among the ordinary people. However, it is wrong to assume that we could inform all the people on the concept, process and importance of the UPR. There is the possibility that some of the stakeholders especially the victim’s groups might have been left out uninformed. However, as our experiences of the past have been documented and reflected in the UPR counter report, the problems of almost all the groups and sectors have been covered by the report.
Nepal NGO Coalition (NNC) including other institutions has already submitted its report. You had led the report writing phase and there was the involvement of 235 NGOs of Nepal. As a responsible person of the coalition, could you share the experience?
Nepali Human Rights Defenders have ability to work together on most of the crucial issues and at difficult moments. A good example can be the collectivism shown by the Nepali NGOs against the king when he usurped power unconstitutionally in 2005. Though we have a very difficult terrain, bad communication and travelling infrastructures, thanks to the well- spread local Media and perennial HR awareness efforts by the Human Rights Defenders and organizations, people are aware of their basic Human Rights and all the political groups have officially and formally recognized HR as an unquestionable philosophy.
Unprecedented convergence of a large number of NGOs for the cause of the UPR is a best example of a collective effort. Amidst their diverse operational priorities, the NGOs played a pro-active role for incorporating their agenda and concerns into the UPR report. I am quite confident that we will be able to maintain our solidarity and partnership in the days to come as well.
It is believed that the pre-review preparation and role of the NGOs can influence the review process and the recommendations that are listed in the outcome report. What preparations have been made so far and what roles and activities, you think, should be there on behalf of the NGO Coalition of Nepal regarding this?
The incumbent Government of Nepal (GoN) has invited our coalition to advise on the governmental report for the UPR. We are in touch with the concerned diplomats to lobby our concerns. We will certainly approach several INGOs working in different sectors. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and Nepal Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR-Nepal) are and will be a good link for getting support from them. We have already briefed them about our process and the expected outcome recommendations. We got support from both the organizations while preparing report. There have been utmost attempts from our side to make this civil society report the best representative of Nepali civil societies. Hopefully, all the concerned parties, national, international and UN bodies will consider our report accordingly. To affirm our voice at the Human Rights Council we are trying to send an effective, inclusive and strong delegation representing Nepali civil societies.
There are comments that the government of Nepal didn’t hold adequate interactions and consultations with the stakeholders while preparing the governmental report for the UPR. What’s your say regarding this?
This time we were a little more hopeful that the government would hold sufficient consultations and interactions with the civil society while preparing its report. There are many contentious issues in the governmental preliminary report. The government hesitates to adopt an inclusive, transparent and public process. However, we will spare no effort till the last moment to make the national report for the UPR factual.
Which concerns and rights issues, though there are many important and serious issues in Nepal, should be addressed by the UPR process with high priority?
Nepal is party to many important international treaty bodies. However, there lie problems in implementing the commitments. National plans and budgets, to some extent, reflect the commitments in principles but the implementation aspect remains a big challenge. The review has to challenge the non-implementing tendency of the Government of Nepal. Human Rights can not be attained until and unless impunity is addressed through the rule of law. Here, one has to understand that redressing the past crimes through the penal system and addressing the caste, gender, decent etc based discriminations by formulating necessary rules and regulations should also come under the definition of the rule of law. Correcting social discriminations and implementing social justice through progressive efforts in law and practice is the urgent now. The review has to address these concerns with high priority.
How optimistic are you regarding the implementation aspect of the recommendations that are made by the Human Rights Council in its outcome report following the review?
It is unrealistic to be optimistic that the government will implement the recommendations made through the outcome report of the UPR on its own volition. The Human Rights Council (HRC) will examine the human rights situation of Nepal on the basis of multiple sources of information. Considering the past remarks made by the treaty bodies, we hope, the recommendations will remind the government of Nepal of its commitments and will make comments on the unfulfilled commitments related with political impasse as well. The HRC’s remarks and recommendations primarily will be a tool for us in influencing the stakeholders to act responsibly. We want to see the recommendations as a tool for the HR Defenders to monitor, lobby and advocate nationally and internationally for a better human rights situation in the country.