The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) has decided to shelve anonymous complaints. However, the proceeding on the complaints will be suspended only if nobody comes forward to verify the occurrence of incidents, the commission said.

“The complaints registered anonymously will also be investigated if they suggest sources to contact to pursue the case,” said TRC Chairperson Surya Kiran Gurung, “It also does not mean the burden of proof lies on complainers.”

He also clarified that it is the responsibility of the commission to collect evidences, not of the victims on cases registered with it. Clause 21 of the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act and Rule 7 under the commission’s regulation state that the complaints will be shelved “if there is no sufficient ground to take action upon conducting an investigation into a complaint or information filed with or provided to the commission.”

Not all victims have disclosed their identity in the complaints due to the very nature of conflict-era incidents. Some of the victims have still been receiving threats for pursuing the cases.

“We need some basis to pursue the cases, such as document trails or someone who could suggest us the sources,” said Gurung, “We will investigate all complaints registered with us irrespective of who filed the cases or against whom.” Rape victims, for instance in Nepal, want to remain anonymous. Gurung argued that the victims’ identity is never disclosed during the investigation but someone has to come forward to substantiate the claim and testify against the perpetrator.

Since the commission has started screening of the complaints and registering on the data base, it has formulated the criteria to shift through over 53,000 complaints registered with it.

The commission has been mandated to look into incidents that took place between 1996-2006. As per the criteria, the incidents should be directly linked with the armed conflict. The commission will postpone the proceeding on the cases if they are not related to warring parties—rebels and the state.

The cases subjudice in the court do not fall under the purview of the commission. Similarly, the commission has decided not to look into the cases on which the verdict has been issued. For instance, former Maoist lawmaker Balkrishna Dhungel has been convicted in the murder of one Ujjan Kumar Shrestha of Okhaldhunga district.