Torture, Rape, Disappearance, Extrajudicial Killing

Asian Legal Resource Centre

In a 124-page report released in January 2005, the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) and the Kathmandu-based Advocacy Forum have described how the fundamental rights of people in Nepal have been suspended as institutions for the rule of law have ceased to function. In other statements made to the commission this year, the ALRC has described the zero rule of law in Nepal and has detailed incidents of extrajudicial killing, forced disappearance, torture and violence against women. In a number of those, it details incidents of killing, forced disappearance and torture of children. In this submission, it adds some further cases of gross acts of violence committed upon Nepalese children, speaking to the total collapse of any means for the protection of human rights in the country in breach of Nepal's commitments under the Convention on the Rights of the Child ( CRC).

As the rule of law in Nepal has all but ceased to exist, children have been subjected to the same torture, killing and forced disappearances as adults in the country. Since Nov. 26, 2001, when the Royal Nepalese Army was unleashed on the population under a yearlong national state of emergency, it has also systematically violated the rights of all people throughout the country without regards to other factors. When carrying out operations, the Nepalese security forces do not discriminate between a 12-year-old and a 21-year-old.

The brutal torture and murder of 14-year-old Kaliram Tharu and some friends in Bardiya District dramatically illustrate this point. Kaliram and his friends were minding cattle and playing together around 3 p.m. on April 25, 2002, when a group of 50 to 60 uniformed and armed Joint Security Force personnel approached. The troops asked the boys if they had learnt martial arts. Being children and seeking to impress the soldiers, one of them boastfully replied that they had training and were paid 150 rupees (US.15) a month. The security officers then accused the boys of being Maoists. Despite the boys saying they were just students, the officers started beating them and took them towards a nursery located on the eastern side of the village. As they were being taken, Kaliram's mother approached the troops and asked why they had taken the boys. The soldiers replied that the children were Maoists.

At the nursery, the boys were beaten and kicked for a further 15 minutes after which they were taken to the Vici Barracks where they were forced to strip to their underwear and lie on the dirt. Then they were taken to the district police office where Kaliram could not eat the food due to swelling on his face. At around 7 p.m., three of the boys, including Kaliram, were taken to the east of the village in a van. They did not come back. Only one person who had been taken to the police station, 27-year-old Bhikhu Tharu, was released. The next day Radio Nepal routinely covered up the killings by announcing that three Maoists had been killed in an encounter in the Mohamadpur area, and bombs, pistols and other materials had been seized. The news did not give names.

Some other acts of torture, rape and killing of children by the security forces in Nepal detailed in the ALRC-Advocacy Forum report include the following:

a. Bandara, a.k.a. Ram Prasad Dhobi, a 15-year-old student in grade five, was killed along with four men - Munabber Khan, 25; Mohammad Khan, 30; Rajjab Khan, 25; and Mahendra Barma, 30 - by security forces around 6 a.m. on April 3, 2004. The group of about 12 personnel from the joint command came on bicycles and captured all five people of Banke District while they were sleeping on the roof of the Ram Janaki Temple in Sonbarsha village. They tied the hands of the five behind their backs, forced them to lie on the road and beat them with batons and kicked them with their boots. They then told each of the men to run towards the fields in turn and shot them in the head. Initially, they spared Ram Prasad, but an officer from one of two vehicles that arrived later shot him too. Afterwards they loaded the bodies into one vehicle and drove in the direction of Nepalgunj.

b. Kumar Lama, a 15-year-old seller residing at Lazimpath in Kathmandu, was arrested in Taku at 11 a.m. on Dec. 29, 2003, and taken to the district police office in Hanumandhoka. According to Kumar, he was sitting in the shop where he works when two plainclothes policemen arrested him. He was brought to Hanumandhoka in a van and taken to the interrogation section where he was beaten for half an hour. The police beat him with a wooden stick on his back, the soles of his feet and his chest. At 10 p.m. that night, he was taken to the interrogation section again and beaten for about two hours. Similar beatings continued for about four days for half an hour each day. While beating him, they told him to admit to committing theft and to name his friends. His older brother was subjected to similar treatment. Both were presented in court on Jan. 14, 2004, on charges of robbery. The judge did not ask them about torture nor were they provided any kind of medical treatment.
 
c. Reena Rasaili, an 18-year-old grade seven student, and Subhadra Chaulagain, 17, of Kavrepalanchok District were shot and killed separately by a group of security personnel after midnight on Feb. 13, 2004. According to Reena's father, around 10 plainclothes armed security personnel came to his house at midnight and called for him to open the door. He did not open the door because of fear so they broke it open and entered the house. After searching it, they pulled his daughter from her bed and took her to the cowshed. The house occupants then did not hear any conversation between Reena and the security personnel, only her painful cries and moaning, which continued for almost five hours. At around 5 a.m., the security personnel took Reena 100 metres away from the shed and shot her three or four times. The family found her body totally naked with bullet injuries to her head, breasts and eyes. She also had injuries and scratches on her stomach and chest. A national radio broadcast on Feb. 13 named Reena among three "terrorists" killed that night in an encounter with security forces.

d. Subhadra Chaulagain, a 17-year-old grade nine student and resident of Kavrepalanchok District, was detained by the security forces after they gang-raped Reena Rasaili on Feb. 13, 2004. When several personnel came to her house around midnight, a friend who was sleeping upstairs reportedly jumped out and ran away out of fear. The security forces fired at him but could not capture him so they went and dragged Subhadra from her bed and took her outside. She cried, saying that she had not done anything wrong, and begged them to take her to the district headquarters instead of killing her. However, the personnel started to beat her brutally and pulled her along. The family, which was forced back inside, then heard around nine gunshots. After that, four security personnel severely beat up her father, blaming him for supporting the Maoists. He finally lost consciousness from the assault but could not go to the hospital because of threats by the security forces. After the incident, Subhadra's 14-year-old brother, Ram Kumar Chaulagain, went into shock, refusing to eat or drink, and went to offer food to the dead body of his sister instead.

The absolute impunity with which the armed forces in Nepal today operate is also evident in the forced disappearance of Prahalad Waiba. Around 11:30 a.m. on March 1, 2004, an armed contingent of about 50 to 60 Royal Nepalese Army soldiers arrived on the road leading to the Shri Krishna Secondary School under the command of the lieutenant in charge of the Farping checkpoint. Four of them in civilian dress and carrying bags on their backs sneaked towards the school. One remained at the school gate while the rest, among them the lieutenant, walked into the school office to the surprise of the headmaster and his staff. The lieutenant unfolded a piece of paper that was in his pocket and after scanning it asked the headmaster for Prahalad Waiba. The headmaster then went to get 18-year-old Prahalad from class nine and brought him to the office. The soldiers took him about 15 metres away from the room, saying that they needed to talk privately with the boy. More than a quarter of an hour passed after which the soldiers returned Prahalad's books and class attendance register to the office before taking the boy from the school before the eyes of all his teachers and friends. When the headmaster asked why they were taking his student, he was told to learn to keep records of his students and staff and that Prahalad was a Maoist.

Pralahad's father, who has been working at the same school as an attendant for the last six years, was shocked that the soldiers could take his son out of the school premises before the eyes of hundreds of people without any warrant. Prahalad's friends and teachers, who state that Prahalad was a naive, introverted and honest boy who spoke only after his name was called a few times, always helped with chores and never left his home before his arrest, were stunned as well.

On April 28, 2004, Prahalad's mother went to the Farping checkpoint to meet her son as he had still not returned home, and she wanted to give him some clothes. However, she was told that she could not meet him. After two months, his father filed complaints with the National Human Rights Commission and the International Committee of the Red Cross (No. 200847). However, to date, there has been no news of his son's whereabouts.

As the ALRC has stressed in other statements to the 61st session of the commission, the massive violation of all human rights in Nepal, including the rights of the child, is occurring because of a total breakdown in the rule of law. Under the circumstances, it is very difficult to produce recommendations to counteract such violence. As noted in a separate submission, what is the possibility of making meaningful suggestions to the international community when there are no longer any mechanisms within Nepal through which human rights can be protected? Given these conditions, the many international conventions to which Nepal is a party, including the CRC, are of little or no significance. Thus, it is with this caveat that the ALRC urges that

a. the commission should pay special attention to the gross acts of torture, forced disappearance, killing and other violence committed against children by the security forces in Nepal, including those incidents described above, in particular through the Committee on the Rights of the Child;

b. the commission should create an international alert on the human rights situation in Nepal whereby the situation in the country can be monitored constantly and reported upon to other agencies to permit a rapid response;

c. neighbouring states and key international agencies, such as India and the European Union respectively, should raise the deteriorating security situation in the country as a key issue for discussion at the Security Council and in other relevant gatherings with a view to active and speedy intervention;

d. international humanitarian agencies must reconsider their current activities with a view to keeping abreast of the rapidly worsening conditions in Nepal and concentrating on necessary steps for the protection of fundamental rights there.