Stop Killing Journalists

Kamala Sarup, USA

‘Don’t kill journalists’ Nepali Journalists and people of all walks of life across the country continue to condemn the killing of journalist Dekendra Raj Thapa. Maoists admitted that they had ‘executed’ Thapa on August 11 after detaining him for nearly six weeks. Thapa is the second journalist to be killed in the country this year. A Paris-based press freedom watchdog, Reporters Without Borders said it was shocked and revolted by this barbaric murder.

Gyanendra Khadka, a journalist with the government news agency Rastriya Samachar Samiti , was also killed by Maoists on September 7, in Jyamire, in Nepal’s eastern Sindhupalchowk District. Padma Raj Devkota, editor of the fortnightly Bhurichula, was killed by army troops in the western district of Jumla in February.

Mr. Krishna Sen, the editor in chief of the Janadesh daily newspaper, disappeared May 20, 2002. His body has never been found. Eight reporters were killed last year; 176 were arrested, kidnapped, or detained; and dozens more were tortured by both the Maoist and by the government. No legal inquiry has investigated these killings. The demand for justice for journalists is gathering strength in Nepal. At last, the media industry is recognizing that it must do more to reduce the risks to journalists who are among the most vulnerable. The kidnapping and murder of a journalist, or of any civilian, violates the most fundamental principles of humanity. We Nepalese people condem the murder of Thapa and urged the PM to ensure that a vigorous investigation is undertaken so that Thapa’s killers may be brought to justice. Journalists have been beaten, gang-raped, or subjected to other forms of torture, including threats against their children since this conflict began. This conflict, however, appears more dangerous than any other.

The deliberate and indiscriminate killing of journalist by maoists in Nepal violates the basic principles of international humanitarian law. Even if we see International humanitarian law, which governs the conduct of the parties in an armed conflict, comprises a series of treaties and conventions, including the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols. Any journalists covering war should be able to report effectively on violations of the rules of war, including war crimes; second, because a number of provisions of the conventions apply directly to journalists. Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, journalists must be treated humanely.

Maoists should remember that media can be an instrument of conflict resolution. It is a media that reduces conflict and fosters human security. While it is true that journalism must be fair and accurate and Media should provide information in an unbiased, neutral and well-informed manner. The latest killings have given a new sense of urgency to the campaign. This is clearly tragic incident, it is extremely regrettable. Such behavior is unacceptable and must be punished. The long civil war in Nepal places it among the most dangerous places in the world for journalists.

The murders of journalists each year receive little attention and often go unpunished. Journalists and media have been targeted everywhere in Nepal. Journalism is the cornerstone of press freedom and we must ensure that there is a proper investigation every time journalist dies. These deaths, whether as a result of conflict, illustrate just how important it is to provide journalists with more protection. Journalists have often been caught in the crossfire in Nepal’s violent conflict between security forces and rebels. Journalism in Nepal with one of the most robust and diverse landscapes for press freedom is facing a crisis of safety for journalists. Despite much talk of ethical principles and human rights the struggle for press freedom remains a lofty ambition in Nepal. The problems in Nepal deserve mention because journalists are most at risk. Meanwhile, there is continuing crisis for democracy and press freedom in Nepal.

There must be no impunity for the killers of journalists and media workers. All journalists are vulnerable when attacks against the press can be committed with impunity.The deliberate targeting of journalists by those who seek to prevent the media from exposing their activities represents a worrying trend in Nepal. If the killers learn that by killing a journalist the media will come together and give them more media attention, that is not true. It is another bad and blood-stained year for press freedom. The human cost of covering the conflict story is already too high. The impact of conflict on the work of news media cast a long shadow over journalism in Nepal.

Media organizations in Nepal need to do more to provide safety training, to journalists, especially to freelancers who are among the most vulnerable. Equally, the journalists themselves must be well informed and aware of risks before travelling to dangerous places. There is no story worth getting killed for. One of the most important skills that journalists can learn is how to protect themselves and each other in the field. Journalists, employers and media unions must lead the way in setting standards for security. Media companies should recognize their responsibility to free-lancers and stringers covering conflicts and should provide them with coverage equivalent to staff correspondents. Even on the other hand, journalists in Nepal have to realise the pivotal importance of the media in the process of conflict transformation if media continues to spew out half-truths, propaganda and poor information, it will negatively counter all other attempts at peace building.

Deuba government should work hard to improve and protect journalists. Governments must put the safety of journalists and media staff to the top of the agenda. Deuba government should changes in national law to ensure that targeting journalists and neglecting to protect them are made war crimes. On the other hand, Maoists should know restricting media coverage of a conflict is not a legitimate reason. They should know that journalists have a special obligation in times of conflict to report both sides of a story.

Proud to be Madheshi?

By Bindu Chaudhary

It is a different matter being a citizen of a country and belonging to a country. One may have a citizenship certificate of a country and be entitled to equality and justice enshrined in the constitution, but it is as well possible that it only remains in the book of law. Madheshis constitute one third of the total population of Nepal (33%), but are meagerly and inadequately represented in Nepal’s socio-economic and political front. Their representation in government bureaucracies is only between five to ten percent, in police force below five percent and in Army it is negligible.

The government policies were deliberately discriminatory against Madheshis, Janjatis and other minorities since the Rana regime and during the Panchayat era. The Ranas exploited the Hindu Caste codification to serve their ends, and the Panchayati era government marched with King Mahendra’s "one-culture, one-language, one-religion, one-country" definition of national unity to "Nepalize" all other ethnic groups. Eventually, Madheshis were left out in the cold.

Even now, the Madheshis are not only barred from access to equal resources and opportunities, but also don’t feel as mainstream Nepalese, because of the way they are perceived, treated, and presumed. Madheshis grow up being called or referred to as "Madise, Marsya, Kale, Dhoti, Hapsi, Indian…" by the so-called ‘true’ or ‘genuine’ Nepalese- the "Pahadis" and other hilly inhabitants. In Nepal, there are gender specific discrimination, caste based discrimination and discrimination based on geographical location. How can a country be developed when it is ruled only by the so-called few ‘elite’ groups- the men, the upper caste and the Pahadis and hilly people?

In Nepal, only Pahadis are considered to be ‘genuine’/‘ethnic’ Nepalese; people from Madhesh are like "foreign invaders"! I must admit, many of the Pahadis and other hilly groups are too naïve in their knowledge. They would simply call all Madheshis as Indians (though there is nothing wrong to be an Indian), or dhotis, or vice versa! If Goddess Sita and Lord Buddha are from Nepal in spite of belonging to Madhesh, it needs some common sense to call Madheshis as Indians and Indians as Madheshis; bliss their ignorance! In fact, except those from the Tibeto-Mongoloid races, all Nepalese had roots from India- the Karnataka dynasty kings ruled Kathmandu, and the Ranas have migrated from Rajasthan in India.

We derive our identity from the world around us. Our self-image is developed through what we see and what is shown to us or what we think and what people think of us. When one is viewed negatively and is insulted time and over again because of the way they are, the way they look or because of their origin, there is some sort of discomfort that sets in the mind. Imagine a Madheshi child being raised outside of Madhesh/ Terai community amidst the Pahadis, and who grow up being name called, laughed at and projected as inferior than the Pahadi counterparts.

Good self esteem comes from being treated positively and getting positive reinforcements not only by significant others but also by the society they counteract with. Consequently, there are Madheshis who do not allow the negative reinforcements from the society affect their lives, there are others who would turn hostile towards their counterparts and call tooth for a tooth. There are still others who use "denial" (completely rejecting the thought or feeling- I am not angry with them, or they don’t put me down!) and "reaction formation" (turning the feeling into opposite- I think they are really great!) as their defense mechanisms and try to change themselves ‘outwardly’ to gain acceptance in that community that looks down upon them. They shape themselves through the desire of others, to be ‘seen’ in the society they live in- though the self-styled image is only a fraud or an emotional wound to hide from their own eyes.

This later category of Madheshis living in the Pahadi community seem to be in a real ‘identity crisis’ in an attempt to ‘become’ or ‘look’ Pahadis themselves. They consciously and deliberately let go (and even ‘forget’) their language, culture, tradition and roots in order to gain acceptance by the Pahadis and/or to be superior to the "orthodox" Madheshis! I understand, who would want to be called a ‘Madise’ or ‘Marsya’ which are pejorative connotations for Madheshi, ‘like Nigger (offensive name for a black person), Kike (offensive term for a Jew) or Faggot (offensive term for an openly homosexual man)? But however cosmetic changes one would bring about outwardly, it would only remain a piece of paper pasted over a gaping hole. Racism is not a biological, but a sociological problem which cannot be solved by doing ‘cut’ and ‘paste’ by those discriminated, but has to be ‘deleted’ by those who discriminate.

Forgetting ones identity need not necessarily command esteem; there are many Madheshis who have earned a lot of name, fame, respect and esteem within and even outside the Madheshi community in spite of remaining closely bound to their roots and land; in spite of speaking their own Madheshi language; following their own rituals and culture; and in spite of proclaiming that they are proud Madheshis.

I have seen Madheshis turned Newars/ Paharis of Kathmandu who find arranging matrimony for their children a distasteful task, because they are either of both are neither of one- accepted by both yet unaccepted by any. However generally, the ‘genuine’ Madheshis take over the preference when it comes to matrimony, because they would not want to be name-called, all over again! Inter-caste marriage is still unacceptable in Nepal, and when it comes to the Pahadi- Madheshi matrimonies, it still is big news. However, love is blind, and Pahadi-Madheshi matrimonies do take place, because ‘Kale’ Hain to kya hua Dilwale Hain!

In a country so obsessed with characterizing what it means to be a genuine Nepali, Madheshis who endured the insanity of the Hritik Roshan episode knows what it means to be a ‘lesser’ Nepali; or those who face hassles getting citizenship certificates knows what it means to be born in Terai Nepal; and those who change their surname, their language and their attire, their culture and tradition… knows what it means not fitting into the concept of the so-called "Nepalipan". However, Madheshis cannot go about living under a veil by letting their rich culture and tradition slide thoughtlessly- to be ‘promoted’, or to be ‘demoted’? No comments. I would rather admire a culture that would allow me to speak of myself in high terms and where I would not have to eclipse myself to prove I am worthy.

Of course, one need not be ashamed of one’s roots, thanks to the significant number of Madheshis who are proud of who they are and speak their mother tongue, respect their culture and observe their festivities and rituals amidst the non-Madheshis. The equation is simple- if you accept a label, it is yours; and if you don’t, it isn’t really yours- you do not have to ‘fit in’ to be accepted. Sum and substance, the so-called self-acclaimed ‘greater’ and the ‘higher’ and the ‘powerful’ need to come out of their comfort zones to broaden the sense of ‘Nepaliness’ to embrace the whole population of Nepal. A Nepali does not have to be a Pahadi or a Himali to be a Nepali. A citizen cannot be a ‘genuine’ or a ‘not-so-genuine’ citizen.

(The author is a social worker, presently a freelance journalist in the USA)

Headline | Opinion | Dateline | National |  5 Question  | Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | International | Tête-à-tête with Amandine | Past