While the world observes the 66th International Human Rights Day on 10 December, the family members of more than 1,000 disappeared Nepalis have not obtained any information about where their nearest and dearest are. They have been questioning the state about the status of their disappeared family members for eight years—since the beginning of the peace process in 2006—but in vain. Similarly, political forces appear to have regarded more than 15,000 people killed during insurgency as insects.
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed on 21 November 2006 between the Seven-Party Alliance (SPA) and the then Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) clearly sought a peaceful resolution of the armed insurgency that apparently demanded the transformation of the political and socio-economic structures of Nepal. Despite the election of the Constituent Assembly two times—the first one in 2008 and the second one in 2013—the political forces belonging both to the former SPA brand and the Maoist brand still appear to have been indulged in tug of war, with both sides focusing their minds on the immediate power, apparently neglecting the human rights conditions in the country. In other words, the victims of the armed conflicts have been sidelined, without any access to an environment for justice and compensation.
The ordinary masses in Nepal had become very glad when the former Maoist rebels abandoned their armed strategy to join the mainstream peaceful path as they obtained written assurances for state restructuring through a new inclusive constitution. But with their position getting far more weakened mainly due to their moral degradation and superficial propaganda marked by incompatible behavioral culture, they now are struggling for their very existence. The former Maoist rebels, with their broken factions now, seem to be more worried about the legacy of their 10-year armed insurgency, especially after the former SPA brand—the Nepali Congress and the Emalay in the main—have repeatedly and publicly argued for a constitution that would not necessarily represent the peace accord-approved transformation agenda. One logic constantly highlighted behind their argument is that they have got the overwhelming majority on their side in the current Constituent Assembly. But the former Maoist rebels have now begun to remember the peace accord, which they rarely bothered to internalize and create a nationwide public opinion about during their heydays after they signed it. The vitals in the peace accord were related to implementing the human rights of the Nepalis—the civil and political rights and the economic, social and cultural rights. If impunity and the state of nonaccountability among all political organizations and state mechanisms continue as today, the Nepalis will have to face far worse consequences. Ground realities are extremely different from the documented commitments. The majority of Nepalis do not have access to democracy though they periodically vote. The majority are unheard of, unreported about—structurally and institutionally excluded. Millions are institutionally and legally exported to gulf countries, and yet they are not behaved as dignified citizens under both the home laws and international migration treaties.
Apart from dishonest and irresponsible political organizations, ranging from A-Z, all-pervasive corruption, deep-rooted ill-governance and unbridled market forces are big factors contributing to the situation of human rights violation and impunity.
Amidst the minimum civic sense and state accountability for its wrong policies and actions, the Nepalis—most of them just vulnerable and credulous because of their noncritical and nonanalytical psychological patterns, especially due to their confinement to daily survival crisis—still hope things will get better. So do the media and mediapersons. The job of creating public opinion for change-oriented actions is the prime concern of the day.