A year has passed since the Ceasefire Code of Conduct was signed between the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) and the Seven Party Alliance (SPA)government on May 25, 2006. The 25-point agreement came after long consultations, and sparked hopes that it would bring an immediate end to the decade long armed insurgency.
The Code of Conduct stipulated that both the parties shall not mobilise, display or use their armed forces in a manner that could spread fear and terror amongst the people; that both parties should not attack or destroy each other’s military or security installations, not lay down mines or ambushes, not recruit new people in one’s military and not spy against each other; that the parties should not organise activities like bandhs (general strikes), transport strikes, obstruction of transportation of essential items, hindering regular development works and functioning of educational institutions; and the return of the seized properties and to co-operation to rehabilitate the Internally Displaced People. The Code also forbade the coercive collection of donations or financial assistance.
Advertisement
Barely a week had passed after the signing of the Code, when the Maoists openly broke it, with armed insurgents turning out in strength in combat gear to exhibit their military might at Prakashpur in the Sunsaridistrict on May 29, 2006, violating clause 2 of the Ceasefire Code of Conduct which says: "Both the parties shall not mobilise, display or use their armed forces in a manner that could spread fear and terror amongst the people."
In utter and sustained disregard of the Code, the Maoists have continued recruitment for their Army in a systematic manner, including the recruitment of children. In September 2006, for instance, it was reported that the Maoists had set up a ‘recruitment centre’ at Sindhiyatol in the Motipur Village Development Committee (VDC) area of Morangdistrict and had already recruited 450 youths for political and military training. They were also running a training camp for the new recruits in the area. In December 2006, it was reported that around 2,000 fresh Maoist recruits had been deployed in different parts of the Chitwandistrict for the expansion of the party and they were given political training in the Third Division camp atShaktikhor.
The Maoists’ practice of recruiting underage children into their army has also continued. In a letter to the Minister of Women, Children and Social Welfare, Khadga Bahadur Biswhakarma, Human Rights Watch claimed that, of the 30,000 persons registered at the cantonments set up for the Maoist armed cadres, 20 to 30 percent (6,000-9,000) were children (under 18), and appealed for their immediate release. Nanda Kishore Pun, deputy Maoist Commander, expressed strong objection to the figures provided by Human Rights Watch, but did not explicitly deny the presence of child soldiers in the cantonments. He said, "There might be a few child soldiers in our cantonments but we will solve this issue once the UN starts the second phase of the verification process." Underlining the denial, CPN-Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal @ Prachanda claimed, on November 18, 2006: "We have never taken the policy to recruit children in to our army. But in our army they feed some children whose parents were martyred. We had some cases where we found that some cadres were children. We have returned them to their parents and helped them to get an education."
However, the Report of the United Nations Secretary-General on children and armed conflict in Nepal, published in December 2006 documented 154 new incidents of active recruitment of children by the CPN-M from May 2006 to September 2006. A February 2007 report of Human Rights Watch, Children In The Ranks: The Maoists’ Use Of Child Soldiers In Nepal, also noted that the Maoists adopted a variety of techniques for recruiting children, like, kidnapping of individual children, abduction of large groups of children, often from schools or at mass rallies which they are forced to attend, and use of propaganda campaigns to attract children as volunteers. They also use songs, dance, and theatrical performances designed to appeal to children; and children often carry out these performances in order to attract other children.
Further, during the registration of the Maoist combatants a large number of cadres were rejected by the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) on the ground that they were below the age of 18. Also the fact that a number of combatants were registered as 18 year-olds testifies to the fact that they were well below the age of maturity at the time of recruitment by the Maoists. Reports of recruitment of children have come mainly from thedistricts of Nawalparasi, Banke, Makwanpur, Chitwan Dolakha, Gorkha, Ilam, Nuwakot, Ramecchap, Kaski, Beglung andKathmandu.
The Maoists have been involved in the coercive collection of money from the people and vehicles around the country, again a violation of the Ceasefire Code of Conduct. Reports indicate, for instance, a collection of NPR 100 from each tourist visiting the Annapurna region. NPR 85 is charged for each bus, NPR 90 for a truck, NPR 65 for a tractor, NPR 105 for an oil tanker and NPR 35 for a jeep operating in this area. In the Sirahadistrict, the Maoists have been collecting NPR 50 per tractor of sand as ‘extraction fee’ from Gagan, Ghurmi, Mainabakti and Kamala Rivers, and NPR 10 per vehicle as ‘road tax’. In the Baradistrict, they have placed obstructions on roads at Nijgadh, Simra, Jitpur, Gandak Chowk and Kalaiya, and are collecting ‘road tax’, ‘scrap tax’, ‘herbs tax’ and ‘forest products tax’ since September 1, 2006. They have also been collecting money at Kabeli, Ranke and other places, demanding NPR 1,000 each from drivers of buses, trucks and other heavy vehicles, and NPR 500 from each taxi driver.
The Maoists have also engaged in regular disruption of the day-to-day administration in wide areas. Insurgents have obstructed the reestablishment of Police Posts throughout the country, as these are expected to hinder their subversive and extortion activities. They have obstructed re-establishment of displaced Police Posts in different parts of the Bhairahawa, Bardiya, Kaski, Sindhupalchowk, Kavrepalanchowk, Sankhuwasabha, Rupandehi, Nawalparasi, Rukum and Humladistricts. Similar campaigns were also reported from far-western districts such as Doti, Kanchanpur and Achham.
The Maoists have also disrupted the functioning of the various VDCs and districtDevelopment Committees (DDC). Padlocking government offices, seizing documents, ransacking the offices, detaining and abducting the officials have been a very common in severaldistricts. Maoists have also disrupted the citizenship distribution process and have frequently interfered in the preparation of the voters’ list across Nepal.
Similarly, reports of Maoists disrupting the gatherings and meetings of other political parties and organisations have come from around the country. The Maoists have clashed with members of other groups, abducted their leaders and captured their houses. In the more recent incidents, on February 19, 2007, the Maoists captured a house owned by Dhirendra Shah, a member of the Royal family, at Nepalgunj in the Bankedistrict on the claim that the ruling SPA and their party had agreed to ‘nationalise’ the properties of royal family. On March 19, Young Communist League (YCL) cadres, a Maoist front, led by Gorkha‘district Secretary’ Chuda Khadka aka Prakash, captured 25 ropanis [1 Ropani = 5476 sq. ft] of land and four houses of former Army Chief Sachchit Shumsher Rana at Laxmibazaar in the Gorkhadistrict, and hoisted their party flag there. Again, on May 19, Maoists captured 58 bighas [1 Bigha = 1.67 acres] of land belonging to four leaders of the Nepali Congress-Democratic Party. On some occasions, clashes with rival political formations have led to killings, as witnessed in the Gaur incident of March 21, 2007, when at least 28 Maoists were killed in a clash with activists of the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum.
General strikes, transport strikes and demonstrations have also been used systematically for political intimidation, in open violation of the Ceasefire Code of Conduct. Forcibly shutting down shops, disrupting the movement of vehicles on roads, etc., has been reported on a regular basis. On December 19, protesting thegovernment's decision to nominate ambassadors and members of the NHRC, thousands of Maoist combatants, carrying arms, came out of the camps in Biratnagar, Dahaban in the Rolpadistrict, Surkhet, the Seventh Main Camp at Taalband of Kailali district, and other sub-camps, and staged demonstrations against thegovernment. They blocked major highways bringing transportation service to a halt. Educational and business institutions also remained closed.
The Ceasefire Code of Conduct asks the Maoists to "return the properties of the leaders, of political parties, activists and civilians, which were seized, locked up or prohibited from being used during the period of the conflict, to concerned persons or their families." The CPN-Maoist’s stand on this issue remains ambiguous.
On March 8, 2007, Prachanda expressed his commitment to return public property seized by the Maoists during the conflict and also promised to help those families displaced during the ‘people's war’ to return to their homelands. On May 2, 2007, however, senior Maoist leader Mohan Baidya aka Kiran declared that properties seized during the conflict could not be returned to their owners. However, on May 13, Prachanda disclosed that the Maoist Central Committee had taken a decision to return seized lands to the actual owners. After discussions with Prime Minister G.P. Koirala, Prachanda agreed to return the seized properties on the condition thatgovernment would improve living conditions of the armed cadres in the cantonments. Then again, on May 17, Maoist spokesperson and Minister for Information and Communication, Krishna Bahadur Mahara, stated that the Maoists would not return seized lands to the owners until a revolutionary land reform act is enforced in the country. He also added that they would not return the properties before the Constituent Assembly elections. However, reports suggest that the process of returning some properties in the Banke and Dangdistricts has now commenced.
Similarly, the Maoists have not shown any serious interest to the issue of rehabilitation of Internally Displaced People (IDPs). Till April 30, 2007, thegovernment had identified 18,924 IDPs from 6,923 families who were waiting to be rehabilitated. The number is expected to at least double after registration is completed in all the 75districts. The Office of the High Commissioner for the Human Rights (OHCHR) in Nepal expressed serious concern about CPN-M’s non-compliance with its commitments to allow the displaced people to return home. The OHCHR noted that many IDPs have not returned home due to the "fear of local Maoist cadres." The OHCHR has also received reports of people trying to return home, but they are being chased away, and in some cases have been assaulted by local Maoist insurgents. There is also the fear that the Maoists expect the IDPs to appear before the ‘people’s courts’ to "account for past wrong-doings".
The government, unsurprisingly, appears to be helpless. Each of the insurgents living in the 28 camps will now receive NPR 3,000 a month to meet their personal expenses. Thegovernment has so far provided the insurgents NR 1.08 billion to run the camps. While Finance Minister Ram Sharan Mahat says the Maoists have given no account of how they spent the money, the insurgents have claimed the money is insufficient. Incidentally, the camps are being managed by the Physical Planning and Infrastructure Ministry headed by a senior Maoist leader, Hisila Yami @ Parvati, wife of Baburam Bhattarai, the Maoist second-in-command.
The Maoists have consistently violated the Code of Conduct, both in letter and spirit, and have continued with subversive, disruptive and intimidatory activities even after joining the InterimGovernment. This has been conceded by their party leader in the Interim Parliament, Krishna Bahadur Mahara, who confessed that, "Maoist cadres were not completely transformed from their earlier mind set and behaviour as rebels… In fact, we are rebels. Our habits have not changed." With the King out of the way, and the National Army effectively immobilised, these ‘unchanged habits’ retain the key to the Maoist strategy to seize control of the country through a combination of ‘democratic’ and coercive strategies against which the Parliamentary parties appear to have no defence.
Advertisement
Prasanta Kumar Pradhan is Research Assistant, Institute for Conflict Management.Courtesy, the South Asia Intelligence Review of the South Asia Terrorism Portal
