Interview with Law Minister Narahari Acharya about the much-debated TRC bill
What kind of discussions are taking place with the UCPN(M) after they disrupted the CA?
We are already taking steps to solve this through discussions. As far as the court case is concerned, it is up to the court and not us to take it to a logical conclusion. Our discussions with the Maoist will be of a political nature, about what is necessary at this moment for the country. For example, we want everyone to be positive about this bill because it is something all of us agreed to in the past.
Both national and international human rights stakeholders have heavily criticised your bill.
I have read many articles and opinions recently, but I have also found some of them have misunderstood things. For example, people keep talking about general amnesty but the bill doesn’t even consider the possibility of such a thing.
But doesn’t the bill include provisions for pardoning perpetrators?
In the bill, we’ve said that pardons may only be given in full agreement with the survivors and victims’ families. I’ve noticed that there is no talk about this in the media. What I can’t say is how much the CA will revise this part.
Isn’t the bill also criticised for failing to categorise any serious crime except rapes?
We have categorised these things, but it may be true that others’ definitions differ from ours. We have included what sort of gross human rights violations the commission can decide upon and have even given it the power to decide what sort of crimes are not pardonable at all.
Have you placed extra judicial killings, homicides, tortures, and disappearance in your category of gross human rights violations?
Of course they are well-defined in the bill.
So these crimes are unpardonable?
It is up to the commission to decide what is suitable for reconciliation or pardon.
But human rights activists say this is where the commission can recommend letting criminals go free.
No. The commission can only make such recommendations if there are facts to prove such cases. I think people are getting confused with the wording of the law.
Will the victims’ families get the justice they’ve been waiting for all these years?
That’s our aim. But we have to understand that this is transitional justice. We already have laws and courts in place to deal with crimes in normal circumstances. Though we tabled a bill recently, all of us know it was defined thoroughly in the peace accord and interim constitution seven years ago. The government cannot forget this fact.
But don’t people from your own party say the NC doesn’t feel strongly about this because it knows many people connected to the regime it ran in those days will be investigated if your bill is passed?
All these is hearsay and guesswork. I am an NC member but nobody has told me anything like this. It is true that I have sometimes been requested not to bring these issues up, but I told them that it is crucial we
discuss it.
Can you reveal what you were asked not to talk about?
Some parties, not the NC, had asked us to remove both persecution and pardons. But what kind of law will that make? What everyone needs to understand is that an individual alone can’t make this law, and as soon as there are two people working on it there will be a difference of opinions.
Since there were two sides, you must have made compromises?
Is it a crime to do so when the peace accord itself is a grand negotiation?
But both human rights activists and victims’ families complain that you have given the commission the power to pardon.
Well, we can’t ignore demands to make the commission neutral, answerable, independent, and of a high standard. We’ve done whatever we can to make this happen. For example, an independent body headed by ex-chief justices will be making recommendations, not the government. We want the people to have faith in the commission.
So when will this bill be passed and when will the commission be established?
We ask everyone to cooperate so that the CA can pass the bill. After that is done, the government will setup a body to make appointments to the commission. And after that, we are committed to giving the commission whatever resources it needs.
Original