Despite objections from the conflict victims, the international community, and the main opposition CPN-UML, the government seems intent on endorsing the bill to amend the Enforced Disappearance Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act 2014. The bill was tabled in Parliament on August 23. The rights activists see the new bill are designed to grant amnesty to those involved in serious human rights violations, torture, and rape. It incorporates terms like ‘murder’ and ‘cruel murder’, ‘torture’ and ‘cruel torture’ without clearly defining them. The vague definitions could be just the loophole that allows perpetrators of these crimes to get away scot-free. The main opposition has flatly rejected the bill, stating that such erroneous provisions should be corrected. After objections from conflict victims and the international community, preparations are underway to form a cross-party committee to address the concerns. The ruling coalition seemingly wants to fast-track the bill’s endorsement to take credit ahead of the November elections.

Also Read: Is PM Deuba attending UNGA?

Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba held related talks with CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli on August 23. In the meeting, UML conveyed that it is ready to lend support for timely conclusion of the peace process but that the bill should be amended. “We advised the prime minister to listen to the concerns of all stakeholders and not to take decisions in a hurry,” says UML leader Subash Nembang. Of late UN’s Resident Coordinator Richard Howard and ambassadors of the US, European Union, Germany and Switzerland have been meeting top leaders of major parties to express their concerns over the bill. They also met Oli on August 24 to voice their opposition against amnesty for serious human rights violators. The international community, however, has not made its position public. “The provisions of the new bill are unjust and we cannot accept it in its current form,” says conflict victim Suman Adhikari. “Murder and torture are grave human rights violations. There is no question of a murder being ‘cruel’ and ‘non-cruel’, unlike what has been provided in the bill.”