Checking Girl Trafficking
Strong Legal Provision And Awareness Needed

By Uttam Maharjan

GIRL trafficking has assumed alarming proportions in the developing countries like Nepal, where there is gross discrimination against women due to age-old patriarchal concepts. It would indeed be saddening to note that even after 26 years since the first World Conference on Women was held in Mexico in 1975 that no remarkable changes have taken place in the status of women. In fact, women have been exploited in society in one form or the other. And trafficking in girls and women may be taken as a gross violation of human rights.

The main factors responsible for encouraging girl trafficking in Nepal are poverty and ignorance. The other factors are the open border with India, non-enforcement of the ID card system, difficulty in identifying the traffickers or brokers and girls going to be sold, the tendency of women workers to cross the border in search of work and so on. The important transit points through which the girls are taken across the border are Kakarvitta, Sunauli, Jogbani, Chapkaiya, Bhadrapur, Pashupatinagar, Gaur, Mahendranagar, Krishnanagar, Banbasa, Koilabas and Jayanagar.

Mostly the rural girls who are uneducated and naive are taken across the border and sold in such Indian cities as Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, Pune and Silugudhi. Some girls are even taken as far as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries and Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand.

The rural Nepalese girls having problem to lead a hand-to-mouth existence, would easily give way to the temptation of a good job and better life in the cities. The trafficker, who are always on the look-out for such girls, would adopt any means to fulfil their heinous objective. And such girls finally end up in brothels in India or elsewhere.

Some girls flee their homes to escape domestic violence or exploitation at the hands of their parents or step-parents and land in the cities, only to be ensnared in the unsuspecting traps set by the unscrupulous persons, who would fob them off with tantalising promises and lure them on to prostitution.

It is estimated that there are over 200,000 Nepalese girls in Indian brothels, leading a hellish life. And 7,000 to 10,000 Nepalese girls are estimated to be trafficked across the border every year. It is reported that such girls are compelled to satisfy at least 5 to 25 customers a day. If they refuse, they will have to suffer excruciating torture.

The girls forced into prostitution are always prone to catching HIV/AIDS and other venereal diseases. Such Girls who have developed venereal diseases are forcibly evicted by the brothel keepers. At times, police raid on the brothels also help in rescuing some victims. The girls, whether evicted by the madams or rescued by the police or others, find it difficult to adjust themselves to society after they have returned home. Such returnees are often considered the dregs of society even by the intelligentsia.

However, there are certain rehabilitation centres run by NGOs or other organisations. The girls who want to live decently by forgetting their ghoulish past may find shelter in such centres, where they are trained in skill development and other vocational activities so that they may earn a livelihood on their own. After all, social mobilisation is an important aspect that would help the victimised girls to lead a dignified life.

It would be appropriate to note herein that the fourth World Conference on Women was held in Beijing in 1995, which was a positive achievement in terms of improving the lot of women. After this conference, the Ministry of Women was established in our country. And various programmes have since been embarked upon to put a stop to girl trafficking. Special programmes have also been initiated in 26 districts badly affected by the specter of girl trafficking, public awareness programmes in 50 districts and social training programmes in the badly affected VDCs.

The efforts of the government alone may not be adequate to check girl trafficking, the efforts on the part of the NGOs, human rights groups and civil society are equally important. The patriarchal social fabric, which often treats women as sex objects from a consumerist point of view, sets the stage for men to exploit women sexually or otherwise. Therefore, such a social structure built upon hollow ideals must be dismantled and in its place an egalitarian society should be built. For this, the national campaign for public awareness against gender discrimination should be spread to every nook and corner of the country, focusing especially on the rural areas.

Similarly, programmes such as income generation, skill development and employment generation should be launched in order to prevent the rural women from drifting towards the city areas. Such programmes have two benefits. One, the rural folk can utilise and improve their latent skills. Two, the locally available resources may be ingeniously harnessed. This will also lead to rural development-which is considered a springboard for overall national development.

There are complaints that the laws are not strong enough to deter the girl traffickers due to their weak implementation and inherent shortcomings. The government should, therefore, take the initiative in amending the laws so as to make them strong, comprehensive and appropriate in the present-day context.

At a time when women’s empowerment is at the centre of discussion all over the country, the problem of girl trafficking should be addressed by the government by forging a partnership with various NGOs, human rights groups and civil society. After all, men and women have equal rights, which has also been guaranteed by the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal. But as things stand, women have been treated as second-class citizens for centuries.

Now the time has come to reconceptualise the role of women in society and recognise their economic work. To allow women to live a dignified life, the gruesome practice of girl trafficking and any other forms of mistreatment against women must come to a halt without any delay. This will definitely be an added advantage in the field of women’s empowerment.

Some Thought On Rocca’s Visit

By Nishchal Nath Pandey

UNITED States Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina B. Rocca visited Nepal as part of her ‘familiarization trip’ to three South Asian nations. Mrs. Rocca, a career officer of the CIA since 1982, succeeded Karl Inderfurth following his resignation in January after George Bush became the President. After leaving the CIA in 1997, one learns that Rocca confined to her role of a senior advisor to Senator Sam Brownback, a republican from Kansas but did not write or pronounce foreign policy judgements of her own. However, her mentor, as the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, played a crucial role in pursuing the Congress that the US should not ignore South Asia. A few months ago, Rocca was a member of a bipartisan group of Washington academics and former government officials established by Washington Institute or Near East Policy, which in a report on West Asia submitted on January 16, advised the incoming President to ponder whether the Oslo process has run out of its initial enchantment and usefully now be replaced. It suggested that President Bush should keep back his deep engagement in the Middle East peace process "for decisive moments" and "reduce the role of CIA in the Israel-Palestinian relationship".

Delivering her text of the testimony at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on May 17th, Rocca outlined her observation with respect to India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh and briefly touching upon Nepal and Sri Lanka while totally excluding Bhutan and the Maldives. It must be noted here that she chose to remain silent about the issue of the one hundred thousand Bhutanese refugees living in the 7 camps in eastern Nepal during her visit to Kathmandu as well. "The nations of South Asia cover the spectrum of the United States’ most vital interests in the world today: on the negative side, we face terrorism, the spread of weapons of mass destruction and drug trafficking. The Bush administration, sees these challenges but recognizes something even more important: In each South Asian nation where we face seemingly intractable problem, we have the chance to work with governments that want to confront those problems with us, to receive our assistance, and to work to assuage our concerns," she said.

While informing the House Sub Committee that "nearly two million people of South Asian origin live in the US", she even configured that "almost every member of the Indian middle class can claim a family member in America", thereby trying to bait on the "chance to promote democracy" and benefit from the "truly amazing economic opportunities." Elaborating her conceivable attitude towards India, she stated that "India’s economic potential, following a decade of free market reform, is immense. We are India’s largest trading partner, but bilateral trade remains far below where it should be." Recognizing the important role of India she did mention that "India is playing a role beyond South Asia" but at the same time counseled that "with that new role comes new responsibilities-economic, political and military." Due to her association with Senator Brownback, who is a supporter of lifting post-Pokhran sanctions several Indian analysts have suggested Rocca will become more sympathetic towards India. While complimenting Bangladesh as "a good news story, especially in the areas of trade and economic development", she went on to make a short shrift on Nepal by stating that "Nepal’s fledging democracy is struggling to cope with a Maoist insurgency (and) the manner in which it balances the need for internal security with the requirement for an open civil society will be a good indicator as to its future." At the same time, it can be understood from her very concise remark on Nepal that the new American administration views the Maoist insurgency as the numero uno quandary facing Nepal’s economic development and its stable democratic future. She praised while on a meeting with the newly installed Prime Minister for the initiation that he took for a political solution to bring an end to the Maoist insurgency which has been taken suitably well by Kathmandu’s elite.

During her visit she followed up on her previous speech by stating that "The US believes strongly the benefits of democracy and we care about the developments of Nepal’s democracy." As per her acknowledgment that the "new administration will not be looking at Nepal from the prism of any other nation", one must not disregard Karl Inderfurth’s identically matching statement given at the SAARC Secretariat’s hall during his visit last year, in the bounty presence of dozens of bureaucrats, journalists and academicians. What has to be analyzed with cautious realism are the odds of shift in US policy towards China and India with the change of guard in the White House and thereby having its ripple-effects on us.

What deserves more significance is the fact that Nepal-US relations have continued to grow with the changes in systems and governments in Nepal. The earliest recorded official contact between the US and Nepal tookå place on June 10, 1910 when William H. Michael, American Consul general in Kolkata, notified the government of Nepal that Nepalese imports would be subject to the minimum tariff terms under the most recent American tariff legislation. This was nearly a hundred years ago. American investors have been interested in tourism, import of readymade garments and in the field of hydropower development in the recent days. We need to together try to cut down instances of corruption and bureaucratic red-tapism or else forget about attracting FDI in the country.

Synopsis Of The  Anglo-Nepal Relation II

By Gun Dev Bhattarai

JUNG Bahadur Rana, after his visit to Europe and Great Britain in particular, was fully convinced that no power could overthrow the British rule in India. After consolidating his position he applied his good services to appease the British in India by helping them in the so-called Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 A.D. but the Rupublic of India has recognised it as her first struggle for liberation. Further, Jung Bahadur concluded treaties with the British to the satisfaction of both parties.

It is not justifiable to think that Jung Bahadur was pro-British out and out. Without heeding to the warning of the British he gave asylum to the Indian fugitives of 1848 and 1858 A.D. Further he was not in favour of installing Gorkha recruiting centres in Nepal. Indirectly. he discouraged the Nepalese to be recruited in the British army. He had courted cordial relation with the British, but not at the cost of Nepal’s prestige and position. After the assassination of Ranadip (1805) Bir Shumshere (1885-1901) helped the British in recruiting the Nepalese in many ways. Nevertheless, no Nepalese was allowed to come into contact with the British Resident. The Resident was not allowed to visit anywhere he liked in Nepal.

Chandra Shumshere (1901-29) Visited Europe and Great Britain in particular in 1908. He was also invited to participate at the function of the Delhi Durbar in 1911 and he was seated as the representative of a sovereign country. During the first World War (1914-18), Chandra Shumshere militarily helped the British by sending twenty battalions. Kulbeer Thapa was the recipent of V.C. (Victoria Cross) and some others were awarded with M.C. (military cross). Chandra Shumshere was promoted to full generalship of the British army and was to be given a 19 gun salute and Victorian Order . He was to be addressed as. "His Highness by deputies. In 1918 he sent 2,000 troops to quell the revolt of Amir Amanullah Khan of Afghanisthan against the British.

The Non-Cooperation movement (August 1920) launched by the Indians under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi forced the British to give some concessions to Nepal. During the visit of the Prince of Wales to Kathmandu both the government of Great Britain had been eager to recognise Nepal as a full sovereign country. After long discussions and deliberation, the deputies of both the governments signed a treaty on December 21, 1923 which is called Nepal Britain Friendship Treaty. There were seven clauses of the said treaty. The signatories of the treaty were Chandra Shumshere and W.F.T. Okoner from Nepal and India respectively. The treaty was recognised by the League of Nations in 1925.

The first ambassador of Nepal to Great Britain was appointed in 1934 and he was treated as one from an independent nation. King Tribhuvana was to be addressed ‘His Majesty’ Bahadur Shumshere, son of Juddha, was deputed the first ambassador to Great Britain Nevertheless, except some clauses all other clauses proved counter productive for Nepal in future.

Bahadur Shumshere was succeeded by Krishna Shumshere, son of Chandra, who on behalf of the Government of Nepal presented the insignia of Ojaswa Rajyna to the British king ‘Emperor George VI. Many countries did not lag behind in conferring honours to Juddha Shumshere. The relation between Nepal and Great Britain was exceptionally different from that of the other countries. Other countries of Europe wanted friendship with Nepal but the latter could not foster friendship with them at the cost of Great Britain.

In the wake of the Second World War (September 1, 1939) Juddha Shumshere visited Calcutta and met with Linlingthgo, the Viceroy of India, and discussed with him about the military aid from Nepal. Accordingly Nepal sent troops under the command of Yekraj Shumshere and Brahma Shumshere. The Nepalese troops took active part in various battlefields. Ten Nepalese nationals received V.C. and many others received various medals.

Juddha Shumshere having realised that the British rule would not last long voluntarily resigned and he was succeeded by Padma Shumshere. It was stated that the British Government was willing to offer Nepal certain territories which were ceded in 1816 to the British but Juddha apprehending future troubles with the independent India, did not accept the offer.

The British Government of India had advised Nepal to promote good relations with India. Regarding the position of the Gorkhalis in India, a tripartite agreement was signed among Nepal, Great Britain and India to the satisfaction of all. The exit of the British rule in India closed the chapter of Nepal-British relation in India.

The relation between Nepal and India under the British rule was based on some logical understanding. Nepal and British India would not allow any anti-Nepal or anti-British elements to flourish in India and Nepal. In short the Ranas’ strategy for survival was bound to be pro-British as long as the British rule in Indian lasted.