 |
|
| Kathmandu, Friday March 14, 2003 Falgun 30, 2059. |
|
Code of conduct
Six weeks since the ceasefire was declared,
the government and the Maoists have come out with a set of code of conducts that would
guide both sides in the mission to translate the present truce into a more meaningful and
durable peace. With its announcement, albeit belatedly, the peace talks do not look too
far away. The code of conduct signed by conveners from both sides —Dr Baburam
Bhattarai from the Maoists and Narayan Singh Pun from the government—certainly does
not have the force or law that invites punitive action on violation by one or both sides.
But it’s a solemn commitment by both sides to find a peaceful solution to the
insurgency and jointly promote national interest. National interest cannot be promoted if
the country is once again pushed into the state of civil war. It’s obvious from the
22-point charter of the code of conduct that any side violating it would be going against
the national interest.
What is more important for any dialogue is
the spirit and drive to achieve the goal set by more than 23 million Nepalese. They have
just one wish and agenda—peace—an essential condition for progress and security.
The government side has not yet constituted the team for dialogue, but it is necessary
that such a team’s capability and legitimacy should be above question. The executive
power at the moment lies with the King, and it is desirable that the political parties are
also given a part in the process. Leaving them out of the peace process would make the
outcome vulnerable and precarious.
Although the code of conduct is an
understanding between the two sides, political parties, intelligentsia, civil society,
besides the media, have their own role to play at this crucial juncture. Failure of the
dialogue will take Nepal to where Afghanistan stood. Nepal commands tremendous goodwill
from the international community, but that support does not come without a price tag.
Their support will be much more meaningful and positive if the Nepalese themselves
demonstrate enough ability and will to establish peace and define the polity that would
govern the fate and future of this country. Political parties’ anger over the October
4 Royal move may have its own context, but they would be failing the nation and people if
they acted in a manner that would disrupt and jeopardise the peace process.
The provision of having a monitoring committee to persuade
both sides to stick to the code of conduct and proceed further with the peace process, and
warn if they tend to deviate may have a positive impact. It is here that the international
human rights groups, civil societies, political parties, media and the I/NGOs can play a
role. But their role would be appreciated if it is facilitating. |
