Perspective (Spotlight Weekly)

Monitoring Peace Process: An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure

By Bipin Adhikari

The ongoing peace talks between the His Majesty's Government and the CPN (Maoist) have been stalled after the second round of talks. The third round of talks between the parties is yet to begin. The situation is characterized by the need for independent monitors and observers to see what's happening on the ground, to serve as interlocutors, to go to points of friction and make an independent observation of what has happened. Perhaps most interesting, is not just a monitoring role but an on-the-ground, on-the-spot observation role as well. In the absence of mutually settled institution, the situation is deteriorating and there is nobody to rush to the conflict areas to check the veracity of each side's claims about the righteousness of its own behavior and the culpability of the other. Indeed, about the need for such an observer group, the two sides need a clear understanding, a clear position on the matter.

In this context, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) expressed its serious concerns on July 29 over the recent series of [angry] correspondence between Government and the Maoists for restarting the peace talks, which has widened the gap and increased mistrust between the parties to the extent that there are fears that "a failure in the resumption of talks could have unimaginable consequences" instead of building mutual trust between the parties.

A ceasefire needs to be monitored. An unmonitored ceasefire is not a ceasefire at all. Ceasefire needs to be monitored because the cooling off period after the declaration of ceasefire is very critical in every conflict. This period must be taken into proper care. It is for this reason that both the Government and rebels had decided during the second round of talk to constitute a monitoring body headed by the National Human Rights Commission to take care of the situation. The Commission had also shown its willingness to take such a role to help liberate the nation from ongoing human rights violations. But unfortunately there was no further progress on the implementation of that decision. The fact that the Commission has not received any intimation letter from the Government or the Maoists to this day gives an impression that there is no serious commitment between the parties to abide by the mutually agreed decision.

In this context, the National Human Rights Commission, which thinks that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, has decided on its own to take the initiative and carry out appropriate activities with regards to the monitoring of the conflict situation in the country, along with the human rights issues stated in the Code of Conduct, which had been agreed upon by both the Government and the rebels. The Commission is also considering formulating the mechanism and principles that would guide the monitoring process. As such, it has declared that it will (a) hold discussions at the earliest with leaders from major political parties, eminent personalities from the civil society and mission heads of diplomatic missions in Nepal; and (b) form a "Monitoring Consultative Committee" consisting of eminent personalities from the civil society and include the members of the Committee in the Commissionís monitoring teams, which would be sent to various parts of the country for the preliminary observation of the human rights situation in the country.

Monitoring is a job for the confidence-building phase. What is happening now in the absence of confidence building can be aptly described as conflict eroding phase. The reason is that there is no commitment towards monitoring human rights violations. The key aspect of all monitoring arrangements is the willingness to engage in open, public, truthful, and non-politicized verification of compliance/non-compliance and the creation of effective enforcement mechanisms. The Commission has, therefore, again urged both the Government and CPN (Maoist) to remain committed to the Code of Conduct, which both the parties have agreed upon for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. It has also urged the parties to proceed for a step further from ongoing exchange of letters towards reconsidering of their respective demands and return to the table for talks as soon as possible in the interest of the country and the Nepalese people.

Moreover, a monitoring system that emphasizes observation but not verification of compliance could easily degenerate into a work-heavy, value-light exercise. Only the public, vocal, and open form of monitoring is likely to do what the people really want the Commission to do -- act as a sort of enforcement mechanism that would give the Maoists the incentive to fulfill their obligations and to provide the Government with the political rationale for continued restraint.

[Adhikari is a lawyer. Comments on the article may be sent on "mailto:human_rights_nepal@yahoo.co.uk" human_rights_nepal@yahoo.co.uk]