It has been over a month since the two transitional justice mechanisms—Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons—began registering complaints of wartime atrocities committed by both the state and the rebels. The 60-day process began on April 15 amid questions about its credibility, given that the state has failed to bring laws that would unequivocally criminalise the worst of offences such as torture, rape, murder and enforced disappearances. The victims also are in the dark about the reparations that they will be entitled to. Despite these shortcomings, the initial response was encouraging as the victims and their families came out in large numbers to register complaints.

But soon, the concern shown by the security forces in the complaints registration process not only discouraged victims to come forward, it also intimidated them in many instances. To make matters worse, security forces deployed their personnel in civvies in some places to surveil the registration process. Many of the wartime atrocities were committed by the security agencies. Having the accused party actively seek details of cases not just undermines the sanctity of the transitional justice process, it also flouts the basic principles of justice. Understandably, this led to a drop in the number of registered cases.

The final straw, however, came in the form of the nine-point deal between the ruling CPN-UML and the UCPN (Maoist) on May 5 that seeks to protect political cadres and leaders from any prosecution. We are not arguing that the regular courts should deal with war-era cases as long as there is some assurance that the victims’ families will get some form of closure within a reasonable time frame. After all, the very rationale for a transitional justice process is to promote healing and reconciliation. But that does not mean providing a blanket amnesty. We believe that forgiveness has to come from the victims, not dictated by the state or the political parties.

Naturally, there is fear among the political leaders, including former rebels, of being dragged to the court. Often one hears a refrain from the leaders who were part of the CPN-Maoist of a plot being hatched against the peace process whenever talks about regular courts pursuing war-era cases arise. While these may be genuine concerns, these are the results not of some elaborate plot, but of the unacceptable delay in establishing the truth. Had the commissions been formed immediately after the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2006, would the victims and their families be driven from pillar to post in the quest for answers and justice?  

It is time the political leaders faced their fears and allowed the transitional justice process to get under way in earnest. They should do so by enacting the necessary laws that the two commissions have been demanding, not by making futile attempts to shield themselves behind a political agreement that may or may not have legal standing if and when laws are drafted on its basis. Transitional justice process is also about establishing full and objective record of the past and to provide emotional closure. While forgiveness could be an important component of the process, it needs to be sought by the perpetrators from the victims. When forgiveness is imposed by other agencies—law enforcement authorities, political parties, or otherwise—it leaves that much less room for healing.