The Nepali Army (NA) on Monday gave some details about the controversial Army Welfare Fund days after the Supreme Court delivered a verdict on a writ petition filed by former NA soldiers five and a half years ago regarding the operation of the fund. The court had issued a mandamus to the defence ministry and army headquarters a few days ago to make the fund transparent and to have it audited, if not already done. In a press conference, the NA spokesman said that the fund has now Rs.10.67 billion, consisting of some Rs.70 million in US dollars and the rest in Nepali rupees, and that it has been periodically audited. The fund annually gets about Rs.400 million in interest on the money deposited in various financial institutions, Rs.320 million from the army personnel going on peacekeeping missions abroad, Rs.15 million from hospital and schools. It was also said that an annual Rs.700 billion has been spent out of the fund, ostensibly on welfare activities.

The spokesman said that the NA is preparing to submit the details shortly as demanded by the apex court. That is all very well. But the fact remains that to make the army part with this much information, ex-soldiers had to fight a prolonged battle and that the army’s record of cooperation with the court on the case has not been particularly praiseworthy. If everything had been above-board, the question arises why the army headquarters tried to throw as little light on the fund as possible during all these years despite the fact that it faced wide and damaging charges of exploiting the soldiers and misappropriating the fund. The most important question, however, is not whether the audit was done, but whether the top hats bosses had the legal authority to deduct a substantial part of the allowances the soldiers on UN peace missions were entitled to. Evidently, the soldiers did not even know what they were entitled to.

What the government should make sure of now is whether the deductions were in consonance with the law. Besides, it must also be explained why the cuts applied only to the soldiers, not to other government employees, such as police personnel, who also went on UN peace missions. Transparency is a virtue, but it is not the be-all and end-all. Tomorrow, the army headquarters may make all details public and may meet the transparency test, provided all information is correct. Closely linked with transparency is the question of accountability, which is even more important. The court has done its duty. Now it is the responsibility of the government, particularly the Prime Minister, who is also the patron of the fund and the supreme commander of the NA, to see whether everything that had been done was legal and appropriate. If not, the affected soldiers should be redressed, including the return of their money along with interest, and the wrongdoers brought to book. Given what has already happened and the atmosphere of distrust, the government ought to form a committee of experts to inquire into the operation of the fund to provide justice to the affected, to prevent wrong or illegal practices in future, and spare the army any further damage to its reputation.