Nepal’s ten-year armed conflict has yet to see a sustained peace process, and tragically, it has been waged since the beginning of this year with greater intensity. The CPN (Maoist) has conducted its so-called “People’s War” with great brutality, and the security forces have committed grave violations of human rights. As elsewhere, these abuses have deepened the conflict and made its resolution more difficult.

In 2003, OHCHR assigned a senior human rights adviser to the UN Country Team, at a time when a mutual ceasefire was in effect and the last direct negotiations were taking place. The adviser worked closely with the National Human Rights Commission in the drafting of a Human Rights Accord, to be monitored by the NHRC with UN advisers. There were strong hopes that the accord would be signed by both parties, up to the time when the ceasefire broke down and negotiations ended in August 2003.

Gross violations by both sides resumed, and were the subject of international concern at the Commission on Human Rights in 2004 and 2005. The Commission in 2005 met in the context not only of this concern, but also of suspension of fundamental rights and arbitrary detention after King Gyanendra assumed executive power and declared emergency. In April 2005, the government entered into an agreement for opening of an office of OHCHR in Nepal to monitor human rights and international humanitarian law. Nearly after a year, OHCHR-Nepal is credited by most observers with having had some mitigating effect on both State and Maoist abuses. Regrettably, no peace process has been initiated although the Maoists maintained a unilateral ceasefire for four months from early September to early January, which was not reciprocated by the government nor further extended by the Maoists. In November the Maoists and the seven-party alliance reached an understanding in which the Maoists made commitments to multiparty democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

When conflict resumed in January, OHCHR called on both State and Maoists to respect international law. But civilians are still made the victims and the conflict is affecting urban areas, and rights are again being violated. No negotiation involving all parties is underway.

The accord mandates the OHCHR-Nepal to “engage with all actors for ensuring the observance of international rights and humanitarian law.” The office engages the Maoists to insist that the wide gap between the commitments of the leadership and the actions of cadres must be closed. While the office has no political mandate, dialogue with non-state actors is serving to reduce the number of victims. While the signature of any joint Human Rights Accord cannot currently be envisaged, the government is fully bound by its treaty commitments. OHCHR-Nepal has thus called on the Maoists to go beyond general commitments and declare publicly their acceptance of all that international law requires.

Arbour is United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights