Leaders of the civil society have expressed their concerns regarding the deteriorating state of the National Human Rights Commission. Speaking at the program on the “Contemporary Role of the National Human Rights Commission in Nepal,” organized by the Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC) in Kathmandu on October 15th, civic leaders shared their apprehensions.
During the event, INSEC Chairperson Dr. Kundan Aryal highlighted the political instability in the country and expressed sadness over the international organization’s recommendation to downgrade the National Human Rights Commission from ‘A’ category to ‘B’ category. Dr. Aryal emphasized the need for National Human Rights Commission officials to prioritize cooperation with civil society and address various issues such as torture in custody, violence in juvenile correctional facilities, and violence against women. He also noted that the Commission’s image had been negatively affected due to blurred boundaries between the judiciary and the executive, suggesting that forming various committees and swiftly working to enhance its reputation was imperative.
Similarly, Hon. Surya Dhungel, a member of the National Human Rights Commission, stressed that the Commission could not prevent its downgrade from ‘A’ to ‘B’ category by the International Coordinating Committee of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) solely through its efforts. Dhungel explained that the recommendation by GANHRI to downgrade Nepal was not solely due to his appointment but rather because the state had not effectively represented its position in the United Nations Human Rights Committee.
Furthermore, another member of the National Human Rights Commission, Honorable Lilly Thapa, alleged that although the appointment process was flawed, those who complained to the GANHRI sub-committee were unable to challenge the constitutional committee members who appointed them. Thapa contended that the resignation of the current commission officials did not guarantee that the Human Rights Commission of Nepal would avoid downgrading. She pointed out that some individuals who had complained about the National Human Rights Commission in GANHRI were currently facing corruption charges in court. Thapa also noted that during the two-year vacancy of the National Women’s Commission, the civil society remained silent, whereas the current commission had been more active, resolving longstanding cases.
Former INSEC Chairman Subodhraj Pyakurel stressed that the National Human Rights Commission should not limit itself to issuing statements but should also actively challenge the government on severe human rights violations and intervene promptly. He suggested that if some representatives of civil society who had raised concerns about the appointment of Human Rights Commission officials had filed complaints, holding the state equally responsible, it might have demonstrated their sincerity. Pyakurel emphasized that while some of the Commission’s work was commendable, its effectiveness would only be apparent if its reports were easily accessible to the public.
Renu Adhikari, President of WOREC, participating in the program, stated that the Human Rights Commission was facing its most challenging period in history and called for the immediate resignation of Commission officials to prevent its downgrade.
Additionally, former member of the National Human Rights Commission, Sushil Pyakurel, mentioned that the Commission had failed to advocate for its own existence when necessary. He criticized civil society for solely blaming the National Human Rights Commission instead of examining the transparency of the state. Pyakurel cautioned that even if the current Commission officials resigned en masse, there was no guarantee that the Commission would remain in the ‘A’ category, urging civil society representatives to remain vigilant, given the current composition of the Constitutional Council.
Rights activist Dr. Gopal Krishna Siwakoti asserted that the Human Rights Commission should have the authority to hold the state accountable for its mistakes. He cited the Commission’s report, which indicated limited progress in protecting human rights and ensuring the safety of victims, with only one or two relief recommendations for victims.