|
|
|
In-Depth:
Between Two Stones - Nepal’s decade of conflict
|
|
NEPAL: Interview with the Royal Nepalese Army's former spokesman, Brigadier-General Deepak Gurung
|
Photo: Naresh Newar/IRIN  | | Royal Nepalese Army's former spokesman, Brigadier-General Deepak Gurung. |
Royal Nepalese Army's former spokesman, Brigadier-General Deepak Gurung.
Credit: Naresh Newar/IRIN |
|
It was only in 2001 that the Royal Nepalese Army was finally brought out of its barracks to quell the violent Maoist rebellion that started in 1996. But since its deployment, officially to provide security and protect civilians as well as to confront the rebels, it has been constantly criticised for violating human rights. Many local and international agencies, including the United Nations, have published reports of Royal Nepalese Army (RNA) involvement in illegal detention, extrajudicial killing, disappearance, torture and other human rights abuses.
In an interview with IRIN, the RNA's spokesman Brigadier-General Deepak Gurung, said progress had been made towards reducing human rights abuses by the military. He also said the military were committed to assisting in finding a political solution to the current crisis.
QUESTION: The UN and several human rights groups have been critical of a lack of respect for human rights by the army. Is this the case?
ANSWER: We were deployed early in November 2001. In late 2001, 2002 and some portions of 2003, we had some human rights violations reported against us, about our soldiers. But since then we have improved on our human rights record and we’ve disseminated training to our low-level commanders. So, we are improving on that scenario. Any soldier, irrespective of their rank, committing violations, will be punished by military law. That is why we have been able to improve our human rights record.
Q: But there has also been also criticism that sentences against soldiers committing human rights abuses have been lenient.
A: Criticisms will be there but whatever the military court has decreed has been followed.
Q: During our recent visit to the key border city of Nepalganj, your colleagues in the military were quite angry with some recent reports by the UN on recent military activities. Is that justified?
A: This must have been due to [Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on Torture] Dr Manfred Nowak’s report. He talked to some soldiers and used the phrase “systematic torture”, which is totally wrong. It is not systematic but there may be individual cases of torture. But then if anyone commits a mistake and we come to know of it, then we will investigate the case and court martial him.
Q: So you can categorically say that accusations about systematic torture within the RNA are absolutely false?
A: “Systematic” was absolutely false. Like I said, there might be some individual cases only.
Q: The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has still not resumed its visit to places of detention within army barracks. Why do you think this is happening?
A: The barracks are open for their [ICRC] visit, the National Human Rights Commission [NHRC] and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights [OHCHR]. As far as I know, there is no restriction and all places are open for them. If they are not visiting, then I don’t know why.
Q: We know that Nepali soldiers have been involved around the world in UN-sponsored peacekeeping activities. It has been suggested by some UN officials that unless the human rights record of the RNA improves, their involvement might be in jeopardy.
A: Our human rights record has definitely improved and we are trying to improve more. It’s our national foreign policy that we participate in UN peacekeeping missions and our troops have been doing very well whether in Sierra Leone, Congo or even Burundi. So I don’t see the reason why we won’t be continuing in our job.
Q: If your record is improving as you say, why are there still reports of ongoing human rights abuses by the military?
A: There are many misconceptions regarding the reports. People don’t visit us and they rely on others [for information]. If our troops carried out an operation in a particular area, they can’t stay in that place for long because they are far from their base. When these human rights organisations visit these places to investigate alleged abuses, they don’t meet the military forces but only meet the locals who are affected by the operations. So definitely, they become biased against the military. I don’t say that all are false. Some could be true also but they are mostly exaggerated. But I don’t think our record is that bad.
Q: The RNA has also started human rights monitoring. So what impact is that having on promoting human rights among Nepali soldiers?
A: The new cells mainly record violations and carry out investigations. At the same time, the RNA cooperates with human rights agencies like the ICRC, the UN, and the NHRC, and carries out training for commanders at all levels. The ICRC has a human rights package and comes here and conducts training. These cells will be soon upgraded at brigadier level and will have many branches so that records improve.
Q: There are reports accusing the army of supporting and arming the vigilante groups.
A: This is totally false. The army does not support any vigilante group. The villagers have themselves formed their own committees, called self-defence or village-defence committees, and the army has nothing to do with these at all. The most important thing is we have not provided any weapons to them. Whatever the villagers have done is on their own and we have nothing to do with it.
Q: If the Maoists agree to extend the ceasefire, is it possible that the army might also agree to reciprocate?
A: The important thing is that they have to stop their other activities, like stop abducting teachers and students from schools and villages, as well as stop extortions. First they have to be clear what they want to do. What we have found is they are recruiting, training and planning big offensives, despite the current ceasefire.
Q: Do you have resources to settle this conflict militarily?
A: To be decided militarily, it requires a lot of resources, many helicopters, manpower and time. The best way is not military but through a political solution, keeping in mind the resources required.
Q: Is it the strategy of the military to pursue a negotiated settlement?
A: Well, we are just a weapon of the government, and the government uses us to contain the Maoists and force them to negotiation. And that is what we are trying to do. We are trying to restore peace and security in the country.
[ENDS]
|
|
|
|
|