Ten percent solution

In whatever fashion the dispute in the hotel industry over a ten percent service charge demand is eventually resolved, it will go down as the sorriest ever episode in the history of tourism in Nepal. Strikes by hotel workers over the demand have brought the hotels to their knees and given Nepal a bad name abroad where the potential tourists are. The knock on effect on the rest of the tourism sector has been serious. The economy as whole has suffered both because of the reduced intake of tourist rupees and dollars and the adverse effect on ancillary services. Tourism, the one bright spot in the otherwise none too rosy economic prospects facing the country, has stood on its head to squeeze out more per individual tourist.

Nepal has few natural resources to fall back upon and the chances of tapping our undoubted hydroelectric potential is still largely a mirage. Whatever manufacturing capability we have faces uncertainty in the face of Nepal’s looming membership of the world trade organisation, one of whose aims is to open up the market here to outside competition. The garment and carpet industries have already run into the ceiling and pashminas are following suit. Remittances from Nepalese workers abroad have yet to attain anything like full potential. Against this backdrop, tourism was the one sector that has performed and can be expected to keep on performing if only it is spared serious labour trouble. It was with high hopes for this industry that the Visit Nepal Year was organised a few years ago. And although its success was somewhat dubious, the country is even now embarked on the Destination Nepal Year soon to tap the potential that tourism still portends. So what exactly went wrong?

The deadlock between hotel workers who would settle for nothing less than the ten percent service charge and proprietors who would have none of it as well as the government’s own involvement constitute an example of how not to drive a perfectly sound industry into the ground. The hotel workers have been pressing home a demand for something which is far from universal in the industry worldwide and which the government’s own committee report on the issue stopped short of endorsing. Hotel proprietors pleaded sheer inability to meet the demand without having their businesses go under. But they failed to respond robustly to allegation by employees that they kept two sets of books to hide their real bottom line. They instead stuck to their guns and called on the government to declare the industry an essential service not subject to industrial action. The government for its part failed to act at all for a longish spell. When it did act it failed to call the bluff by either conceding the hoteliers’ demand or going after the parallel books. Worse still, it is now emerging that both the ruling and opposition parties have hailed to rein in their respective trade union affiliates which have backed the hotel workers’ militancy. It has even been suggested that the trade unions were allowed to push the hotel industry to the brink so that it would become amenable to contributing generously to party coffers. That is simply no way to treat a vital sector of the economy.

Human rights violation against British Gurkhas

By Hiranya Lal Shrestha

The fundamental objective of the human rights movement is to eradicate discrimination worldwide and uphold the principle of equality for all. The British Gurkhas have been subjected to serious discrimination, injustice and oppression by the British government from the very beginning of their recruitment.

A maximum number of Gurkhas were recruited during the First and Second World Wars. The highest numbers of those killed, maimed or disabled in those two wars were Gurkhas when viewed from the perspective of their country's population. The British government forced most of them to return home empty-handed after the wars in a manner indicated by the popular proverb "Forget the stick, after crossing the brook".

The British government held talks with Nepal and India and signed the Tripartite Agreement in 1947 with the intention of retaining some of the Gurkhas and leaving the rest with India. It was agreed that the British government would retain 8 of the 20 battalions and leave 12 battalions for India.

As Nepal was not willing to supply her citizens as "mercenary" it was emphasized that the Gurkhas would be regarded as "Army by Agreement" and an "Integral part of the British Army". Thus, a clear-cut legal base for the Gurkhas’ foreign service emerged only after 1947.

The agreement was loaded with various arrangements, including places of recruitment, transport, and supply. Nepal had not signed the agreement which was signed by representatives of the UK and government of the Dominion of India. The agreement has incorporated a clause in an annexture stating that the basic salary rates of the Gurkhas serving in the UK will conform to the Indian Pay Code. A question is now being raised as to why it should be binding for Nepal.

British soldiers were entitled to promotion to the level of Commander-in-Chief. The Gurkhas are, however, not entitled to promotion beyond the level of Major in spite of their ability and competence.

There is a separate officers’ mess at barracks for British officers. Gurkha officer are not allowed to enter the British officers’ mess. There is difference in the quality of rations distribution to British and Gurkha soldiers. There is discrimination even in the quality of drinks and cigarettes distributed to them, as they receive drinks and cigarettes of different brands.

The concerned authorities resorted to mass dismissal of an entire unit of the British Gurkhas in the name of indiscipline, and without giving them an opportunity for defending themselves for resisting the humiliation caused to them when their race and country were insulted by their British officers who termed them "savage hungry, uncivilized and impolite". They became defiant only after the humiliation became unbearable but entire units were dismissed in the Hawaii, Singapore and Brunei cases. In fact, the British officers should have apologized to the Gurkha officers for insulting their race and country.

Many Gurkhas were sent back to Nepal empty-handed, without pension and compensation, at the end of the Second World War in 1945 and the 1965 war between Indonesia and Malaysia. There exists not only a wide gap in the percentage of redundancy rate between the British and the Gurkhas, but the Gurkhas are also deprived of the compensations and other benefits which the British receive.

Britain has been earning profits by using the Gurkhas as saleable and resaleable items. When the Gurkhas were used to fight guerrillas in Malaya, Britain received $ 450 per soldier but paid only $ 42 to each of the Gurkha soldiers. It earned $ 408 from each Gurkha soldier. Similarly, the Gurkhas have alleged that the British government has been earning a huge profit by supplying Gorkha soldiers to Brunei to work under its security service. Britain has been unable thus far to refute the allegation, but it has been treating the Gurkhas as bonded labourers for the sake of earnings.

According to ILO conventions, there must be "equal pay for equal work". The British government has violated the ILO conventions by paying the Gurkhas far less remuneration and pension than their British counterparts.

Many widows of Gurkha soldiers, who died in active combat during the various British imperial wars were not compensated in any way. According to the British government, about 14,000 Gurkha soldiers died in the two World Wars. (GAESO claims that the number of Gurkha soldiers, who died in the wars, is much higher .) But their widows did not receive any compensation or benefit which they were entitled to. A retired Gurkha Corporal, the lowest rank within the British Army, is paid a monthly pension of 24 British Pounds whereas a British national of the same rank and position is entitled to more than 400 Pounds each month.

When voice was raised at the international level against discrimination, equal compensation was announced for the first time in 1999 for the family of Gurkha soldier Balaram Rai who was killed in Kosovo, but payment is yet to be verified from his family.

Many of the Gurkhas enlisted in the British army are followers of Buddhism and the Kirant religion. However, they are all enlisted as Hindus. Priests are not available for non-Hindu Gurkhas to perform their religious rites. The word "Hindu" along with the Army number is marked in the identity discs of Gurkhas. Attention has not been paid to how non-Hindus will view this type of partiality in favour of Hindus. Prior to 1950, Gurkha soldiers returning home from overseas service had to undergo a religious cleansing ritual called "patiya" performed by Hindu priests. The then Badaguruju and Guruju collected a huge amount of money by performing "patiya" for the Gurkhas, including non-Hindus, when they returned home from the two World Wars.

Some of those who were Christians when they were recruited in Nepal discovered only later that they had been automatically registered as "Hindu" and thus were prevented from attending Christian worship. Mr David Alton, MP, alluded to this fact in his speech to the House of Commons on March 25,1986. After the restoration of multi-party democracy in Nepal, there has been greater tolerance of religious freedom. The reflection has been felt in the British Gurkhas too, but there is no evidence of an official policy change on religious rights.

GAESO has demanded that Gurkhas who have been given forced retirement on the plea of redundancy without any benefits whatsoever, be provided with regular pensions and other benefits extended to other soldiers of the same rank in the British Military. This is a justified demand. The next demand is that Gurkhas retired with nominal pension be provided with pension benefits extended to other soldiers of the same rank in the British army. This is also a just demand because the limited benefits provided to them is greatly insufficient to maintain their life.

Many Gurkhas who fought during the World Wars and other wars have not returned home. Their wives and children are waiting for them even to this day. They have the right to know about the exact status of their husbands or fathers. This right to information has been denied to them. Since they are deprived of the right to know the exact status of their husbands and fathers, they are also deprived of the benefits they are entitled to.

Many Gurkhas, who were returned home after they were wounded or disabled in the war, have complained that they have not received any ‘disabled pension’. Even those who have received such pensions have not received an amount sufficient to maintain their life. The British government cannot escape from this humanitarian responsibility. Britain and India divided the Gurkha battalions between them in 1947, but the two battalions left in Burma, the second Burma Regiment and the fourth Burma Regiment, and Gurkhas of the Supporting Ancillary Unit retired and returned home. However, they have not received pension. They allege that Britain abandoned them in an inhumane manner. Similarly, it is speculated that some Gurkhas may have been abandoned in different fronts after the wars were over.

A British soldier can keep his wife with him. He receives separate quarters to live with his wife. Gurkha soldiers have been deprived of such facility. They are allowed to live with their wives only for three years during their total service period. British soldiers are allowed to meet their children on every long holidays. The travel costs of the children are paid by the government. In such cases the Gurkhas have a limited facility.

When the British soldiers are assigned in such a way in which they are separated from their families, they are paid separation allowances, but the Gurkhas are deprived of such benefits. Until 1976, underage Gurkha boys were recruited and employed at a low wages. Thus the British government indulged in child labour. After making them an integral part of their service, the Gurkhas and their children should have been given resident visas to settle in the United Kingdom, but they have been denied this facility. There is no future for children of the British Gurkhas because there is no guarantee of their proper education and opportunities for employment.

Japan paid a compensation of 10,000 dollars for each of the British Prisoners of War (POWs) it had detained. However, the British government did not compel Japan, Italy or Germany to pay such compensation to Gurkha POWs. Some of the Gurkha POWs died an untimely death because of snowfall in Europe and disease, hunger and want in the East. Living POWs have complained that the Gurkha POWs were forced to labour hard at the Labour Camps but they were given meager food and scarce clothing.

GAESO’s movement is not merely for partial increment of pay, pension and other benefits. It aims to achieve total equality vis-a-vis British soldiers. So the struggle must continue until these objectives are achieved. On the national front, civil society and human rights activists should build up massive public pressure to end discrimination and injustice against their fellow citizens. On the diplomatic front, Nepal should review and revise the Tripartite Agreement and amend clauses which are instrumental in causing inequality and injustice to the Gurkhas.

On the international front, efforts should be made to exert international pressure in accordance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other Covenants on Human Rights and the ILO Conventions to end discrimination against the Gurkhas. Cases should be filed at the British Courts to end discrimination against the Gurkhas. If justice is not meted out to them by the British Courts, a petition should be submitted to the European Commission on Human Rights to redress the grievances. The issue of discrimination against the British Gurkhas should be raised forcefully in different forums of United Nations Human Rights agencies, the ILO and other international agencies concerned with this issue and efforts should be made earnestly to seek justice.

(The author is ex-chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Human Rights Committee of House of Representatives)

Hakim industry

By Tilak Pokharel

Despite a significant growth in literacy rate and a growing number of people getting higher education, you may wonder why Nepal is still underdeveloped while the rest of the world is pushing ahead with remarkable efforts to make the moon and Mars favourable for humans. You may need to think a lot over it, but I plead you not to blame our education system for this. Our education system is simply excellent, but not the faulty one as some ‘experts’ say. Why to blame our education system? Unlike other education systems abroad, our education makes us bosses or hakims, in common parlance, who don’t have a single concrete work to do, but just sit on a revolving chair and order their "juniors". "Do this. Don’t do that," the chorus never ends.

We, Nepalis, have harboured a dream that after finishing Bachelor’s level or so, they can become hakims. They are supposed not to do any hard works. As the literacy rate and the number of people getting education are increasing, it is equally producing more number of hakims, which is making our country hakim-saturated. I am proud of this. One who passes a Bachelor’s Degree goes on looking for a post of hakim in an office within the city. But he/she does not go to a village for a work.

I have also obtained the Bachelor’s Degree, hence I am eligible to be a hakim. Now, I am happy that I need not go to a village and plough the dry field or I need not be a junior in any office. Now onwards, I will get money just by sitting on a revolving chair and by ordering my subordinates. I don’t need to take any vocational or skill training because I am already a hakim. This is indeed one of the privileges of getting the ‘Nepali’ education.

But not all are as fortunate as we are. Poor foreigners! They have to work hard in every way, even after receiving a degree in Ph D. Their certificates will do nothing, but their skill matters. Some of you may be inquisitive to see Nepali hakims. For that, you just come Nepal and you will automatically encounter the orthodox hakims in some of the government offices such as immigration office, Tourism Ministry and tourism-related departments, to name a few. They will show their hakimness by dilly-dallying with your works and much more. And, above all, you will also come to know that they are highly bureaucratic, which is one of the outstanding characteristics of a hakim.

Some of the foreigners coming to Nepal are as lucky as we are. Though they have never joined a Nepali school for acquiring our education, they have learnt the ‘Nepali’ education from experience and how to sit on a revolving chair, just like a Nepali hakim does. They have contributed a few more hakimi things to our orthodox hakimalism. Our hakims have learnt from foreigner hakims living in Nepal to go for dinner, casinos, discos and night clubs. Yes, the desi hakimi phenomenon is fast catching on.

Anti-poaching laws, how long will it shine ?

By Samrat Rana

Poaching is rampant in the national parks in the Terai region. Poachers take anything that comes their was from deer and wild boar to endangered one horned rhinos. Anti-poaching units are responsible for protecting wildlife in Nepal’s national parks.

Royal Chitwan National Park (RCNP) has long been one of the country’s treasures of natural wonders. The park is situated in southern central Nepal, covering 932 sq km in the subtropical lowlands of the inner Terai. The area comprising the Tikauli forest from Rapti river to the foothills of the Mahabharat extending over an area of 175 sq km, was declared Mahendra Mriga Kunj (Mahendra Door Park) by the late King Mahendra in 1959. In 1963, the area south of Rapti River was demarcated as a rhinoceros sanctuary. The area was gazetted as the country’s first national park in 1973. Recognizing its unique ecosystems of international significance, UNFSCO declared RCNP a World Heritage Site in 1984.

In 1996, an area of 750 sq km surrounding the park was declared a buffer zone which consists of forests and private lands. At present, the park and the local people are jointly initiating community development activities and managing natural resources in the buffer zone. The government has made a provision of plowing back 30-50 percent of the park revenue for community development into the buffer zone.

RNA colonel case: There is a recent news report that the District Forest Office (DFO) in Chitwan had arrested Royal Nepal Army (RNA) officer Mr Rana on the charges of shooting a barking deer. But when he was approached by the security guards at the Royal Chitwan National Park, a government protected conservation area, he resisted and instead threatened to shoot them too. It has also been learnt that the army colonel and his accomplice were rescued by the army who walked into the DFO office and escorted him out to the safety of nearby army camp without taking permission from the DFO.

Probably, in the recorded history of Nepal, this is not the first time that he has been found poaching wild animal in the national park. But he managed to give the authorities a slip in the past. Some are of the views that an army personnel is handed over to the army to be court marshalled even if that person has committed crime in a civilian area. The District Forest Officer sources said that Colonel Rana is probably the first army personnel to be arrested on charges of poaching a wild animal. A strong message has been sent to the more organized poachers. They may be now more aware that there is an effective anti poaching unit here.

This has happened when the media was covering the news recently like. " Wild animals and timber are being smuggled openly from jungles in Chitwan. It is highly believed that local administration is also involved in such deals and protecting the smugglers. Two deers and a wild boar were killed in Satanchuli jungle, near Ramanagar, just two weeks back. The hunted bodies immediately disappeared from the site. Who those hunters were and where they came from, it is yet unknown.

Local people are of the view that it is quite impossible for hunting those restricted wild lives without the protection of local administration. In this regard, Chitwan has become the heaven for those smugglers and, on the other hand, this has created a problem in the protection of those wild lives.

Public interest litigation: Public interest litigation is not an isolated phenomenon concerning only the problem of locus standi, but is an integral part of distributive justice as distinct from the restrictive concept of justice for the privileged few. Public interest litigation is a part of such process for ensuring access to law and justice, the same being part of our constitutional commitment.

All through the ages, people have longed for an orderly and civil society. The rule of law which is the basis of a civil society is closely linked with access to law and justice. Justice for all can be ensured only if the courts would unhesitating acknowledge the right of every citizen having the right to equality before law and equal protection of law. In understanding this concept of the rule of law, the question has often been asked as to what the role of the court is and what the law is. Should a citizen be turned away from the court merely on technical plea inspite of the fact that he has a genuine interest and a grievance? Is the law to be framed, interpreted and enforced in a context devoid of socio economic reality or must it be understood in the context of society and in the context of the changing reality?

Section 10/A of Muluki Ain, which prohibited a person of certain cast from entering temples or religious places, as backed by tradition or convention, was also successfully challenged before the Supreme Court which declared it ultra virus on the ground of discrimination. Similarly, Sec 1 (3) of the Sainik Ain authorizing military courts to take criminal actions against civilians was declared ultra vires to the Constitution. The Supreme Court also directed the Ministry of Law to replace Section 208 of the Muluki Ain on court procedure which penalized the accused for appealing to higher court against the punishment imposed upon him or her by the lower court, if the appeal was rejected, as being violative of the principle of human rights.

In sum, the efforts against anti-poaching deserve due respect and hopefully, in the forthcoming days it will be more effective.