March 13, 2026 02:40 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
America’s flip-flop on Russian oil: How Washington sends conflicting signals to India | Big diplomatic win! Iran allows Indian oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz | ‘It was over in the first hour’: Trump declares victory in Iran war, says ‘nothing left to target’ | Indian-origin shopkeepers face targeted attacks in Wembley; Somali men suspected | Iran pulls out of 2026 FIFA World Cup amid war with US-Israel | Supreme Court allows first-ever passive euthanasia for 32-year-old man in coma for 13 years | As Iran-US war disrupts global gas supply, India issues guidelines to manage shortages | LPG crisis hits metros: Commercial cylinder shortage triggers panic as govt prioritises domestic supply | Iran war disrupts LPG supplies, restaurants in major Indian cities edge towards shutdown | ‘How dare you question judicial officers?’: SC raps Bengal SIR pleas, orders appellate tribunals for voter list appeals
Photo: RP Humagai

Nepal: UN concerned at amnesties for human rights abuses

| | Apr 15, 2014, at 07:03 pm
New York, Apr 15 (IBNS): The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Monday voiced grave concern at a bill presented to the Nepalese Parliament which could lead to amnesties for serious human rights violations, saying it would weaken the foundation for a genuine peace in the country.
Under the bill, which is aimed at creating a truth and reconciliation commission and a commission on disappearances, these two bodies will be granted the powers to recommend amnesties, including for serious human rights violations, or to excuse perpetrators of such violations from prosecution.
 
“While I welcome steps taken by the Government of Nepal to take the transitional justice process forward, I am extremely concerned by its new attempt to introduce amnesties for serious human rights violations,” Navi Pillay said in a news release.
 
“Such amnesties not only violate core principles under international law but would also weaken the foundation for a genuine and lasting peace in Nepal,” she added.
 
The High Commissioner stressed that the people of Nepal have the right to know the truth about what happened during the decade-long, internal armed conflict which affected their country, through a genuine truth process.
 
“This process should be victim-centred, depoliticised and should respect the right to a remedy and accountability through criminal prosecution,” she stated.
 
At least 13,000 people were killed during the 1996-2006 conflict in Nepal, with a further 1,300 still missing, according to the UN human rights office (OHCHR). To date, not a single person has faced criminal prosecution for serious human rights violations committed during the conflict.
 
The amnesty provisions in the bill, to be reviewed by Parliament this week, replicate those in the Ordinance passed in March 2013, but struck down by the Supreme Court of Nepal on 2 January as unconstitutional and in violation of international standards.
 
According to international law, amnesties are not permitted for gross human rights violations nor are other measures that block criminal investigation and prosecution for such violations or violate the right of victims to an effective remedy.
 
“I call on the Government to respect international law and to fully implement the decision of the Supreme Court, which clearly stated that commissions should not be used to prevent, replace or delay criminal investigations and prosecution for serious human rights violations,” said Pillay.
 
 
(Candles at a memorial event form the number 13,246, the official count of Nepalis killed as of May 2006. Photo: RP Humagai)

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.