International experience shows the importance of an autonomous mechanism to oversee and monitor the implementation of peace agreements. Many peace agreements have special provisions for an oversight forum to accomplish this complicated task. They even have time-bound implementation schedule. This mechanism provides advice and support to the stakeholders and facilitates for addressing disputes between the stakeholders in the course of its implementation. It is also supposed to promote confidence building measures between them. Such an inbuilt independent mechanism to monitor the whole peace process ensures that understanding and agreements would be executed as per their true spirit. But as we all know there is no provision of this sort of mechanism in our CPA or in other subsequent agreements. Had this been an integral part of the accord or other agreements, our peace process would certainly have been different today. The mechanism would be constantly watching the behaviors and activities of all concerned parties and producing impartial reports for the consumption of the general people. Perhaps, this could have played an important role of reminding all political parties of their commitments and bring them back on track whenever they drifted away from it.
The peace process is not going smoothly because there is no vibrant, competent and independent monitoring mechanism—an important aspect that the major political parties overlooked when signing the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA).
Probably realizing the necessity of such an impartial body, a High Level Political Mechanism (HLPM) was devised during the time of Late Girija Prasad Koirala but it could not be effective because of its failure to garner sufficient political support. It was sure to be ineffective as it had neither constitutional nor any legal backing. In fact, in the absence of monitoring provision political parties could not be held accountable for their wrong deeds, and their self-motivated and arbitrary interpretation of the agreements signed in the past. As a result, there is no way to tell the political parties that they have been violating their past commitments and rules of the game. This sort of feedback is a must for bringing the parties under people’s scrutiny. Feedback of performances have to be given to the concerned on time so that mistakes can be duly corrected. Though it is already late it would be better to devise a monitoring mechanism for smooth and unhindered implementation of the peace process. This institution should have clear-cut mandate to have a role of monitoring or refereeing to pinpoint the players’ faults. The next government should take this matter very seriously. Political consensus, of course, is essential for establishing such a monitoring body.
Smooth and efficient execution of any accord demands honesty on the part of the parties concerned. Even in the post-accord situation differences have to be managed through free and frank discussions so that amicable agreements can be sorted out. Mere signing of an accord or pact does not mean that all differences are managed and consensus is achieved in all issues. To keep all parties engaged in constructive dialog and encourage them to sort out their differences, independent but assertive institutions that enjoy trust and confidence of all are extremely essential. Our peace process probably has intended to bestow this responsibility to the proposed Peace and Reconstruction Commission. Both CPA and Interim Constitution have endorsed this institution but so far it has not been confined to agreement only. Its necessity is badly felt in times of crises to bring all parties together on the table to sort out their problems.
Ministries should not be seen as substitute to such independent commission because ministries are under control of political parties. The political biases can negatively influence the whole process. The Ministry for Peace and Reconstruction is an example. Therefore, there is no question that we need an independent institution until the peace process finds its logical conclusion. Prompt initiation in this regard would be a welcome step.
Institutional arrangements, laws and regulations and procedures are means to achieve goal or end. Mean is definitely very important but the end is even more important. Everybody’s contribution in building and sustaining peace is highly valued. But its up to the political parties to play a decisive role. Therefore, they must work hard and with utmost honesty and sincerity to bring peace in the country by giving up their petty party interests. Therefore, it is extremely important that an independent monitoring body is established at the earliest and take a positive step forward in fulfilling peoples’ aspirations.
ppneupane@gmail.com
Related story
Desperate search for missing girls as nearly 80 dead in Texas f...
-1782782519.webp)
