More British collusion in torture

This time in Nepal, where they funded, equipped and supported a regime torture-squad:

British authorities have been accused of funding a four-year intelligence operation in Nepal that led to Maoist rebels being arrested, tortured and killed during the country’s civil war.

Thomas Bell, the author of a new book on the conflict, says MI6 funded safe houses and provided training in surveillance and counter-insurgency tactics to Nepal’s army and spy agency, the National Investigation Department (NID) under “Operation Mustang”, launched in 2002.

[...]

“According to senior Nepalese intelligence and army officials involved in the operation, British aid greatly strengthened their performance and led to about 100 arrests,” said Bell, whose book Kathmandu is released in south Asia on Thursday.

“It’s difficult to put an exact number on it, but certainly some of those who were arrested were tortured and disappeared,” he said.

There's the usual government denial that their spies ever participate, condone, support etc torture, ending with

We would never authorise any action in the knowledge or belief that torture would take place at the hands of a third party.

And that's the problem right there: they pretended they didn't know the consequences of their actions, so they could pursue their geopolitical aims. Its about plausible deniability, not ethical behaviour.

This has happened too often: the US, Pakistan, Libya, and now Nepal. There is a clear pattern of behaviour here of support for and collusion in torture. Those responsible for it need to be identified, dragged kicking and screaming into the light of day, and prosecuted. And if the British government won't do it, then the UN should do it for them.

Run out of town on a rail

Nepal has finally declared itself a republic, and run its king out of town on a rail. Previously regarded as a god, his popularity had declined after he decided to rule absolutely and murder people to retain power. He will now be treated as a commoner, and his palaces will be seized and turned into museums for the benefit of the people.

Sic semper tyrannis, and don't let the door hit your arse on the way out.

No freedom of speech in Nepal

Today, Tibetan women demonstrated peacefully in Kathmandu, calling for a free and independent Tibet.

They were arrested. Over 500 of them are now in a government detention centre, simply for peacefully expessing their views.

This is an outrageous denial of freedom of speech, from a government which should know better. In case they've forgotten, they are only in power today because so many Nepalese took to the streets to defend the right to speak out against their absolute monarch. But like their (almost former) king, the Nepalese government claims the right to jail any who disagree with it. I guess nothing has changed there after all.

The end of Nepal's monarchy

Last week, Nepal went to the polls to elect a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution. Results have been trickling in, but the trend is clear: the Maoists are well in the lead, with three times as many FPP seats as the next largest party (though looking at the vote counts on Wikipedia, this says more about the unfairness and distortions of FPP than the popularity of the CP (Maoist)). Some are tipping them to gain an absolute majority, but that doesn't seem to be reflected in the PR results. But one thing is clear: the monarchist parties have been absolutely devastated - and the Maoists are already telling the king to pack his bags:

"In the first meeting of the constituent assembly we will declare the country a republic, then we will notify the king to leave the palace," [CNP(MP Deputy Baburam Bhattarai] said.

"As an ordinary citizen, he will have to abide by the law."

After the massacre he perpetrated on his own people two years ago, that's letting him off rather lightly.

Partial election results can be viewed here and here.

Nepal votes

Nepal goes to the polls today to elect a new Constituent Assembly which will revise the constitution and hopefuly abolish the monarchy. According to the Wikipedia page, the Nepalis are using a Supplementary Member system, with 240 members elected in FPP constituencies and 335 from proportional party lists (an additional 26 members will be appointed by the Prime Minister). There's been some violence - Nepalese security forces shot a group of Maoist poll workers a couple of days ago, and at least one candidate has been murdered - but it seems to be going pretty well despite that. Hopefully it'll finally resolve some of Nepal's constitutional tensions and set the path for a gradual shift to multi-party, democratic republic.

But will they prosecute?

Six months ago, Nepal's king responded to mass protests demanding democracy with bullets. He was eventually forced to submit, and constitutionally emasculated by the newly restored Parliament - but at the cost of 22 lives and more than 5000 wounded. Now, a panel set up to investigate the government's response to the protests has found that King Gyanendra was responsible for the killings. The question now is whether they will prosecute, or whether the aura of monarchy is somehow an excuse for cold-blooded murder.

The US promotes civil war in Nepal

Two months ago, the Nepali people staged a series of mass public protests to restore Parliamentary rule and emasculate their absolute monarch. One of the side effects of this has been hope for a final end to Nepal's long-running civil war, with the Maoists unilaterally declaring a ceasefire, beginning talks to join the interim government, and pledging to participate in elections to a constituent assembly to draw up a new constitution next year. But now, the US seems to be trying to fuck that up, by threatening to cut off aid to Nepal if the Maoists join the government without giving up their weapons. The reason? The Maoists are terrorists. The fact that they are terrorists who are showing every sign of wanting to work within a democratic system rather than in opposition to it doesn't seem to matter.

Hardarse tactics from the US are not what Nepal needs right now. Instead, it needs time for the parties to come to trust one another, and for the negotiations to work themselves out. The American threats seem calculated to disrupt that, to drive a wedge between the Maoists and Nepal's government, and prevent any final settlement from emerging. It seems that the US would prefer to see a bloody civil war drag on, than risk seeing communists gain power via the ballot box...

"That for your Royal Prerogative, you blaggard!"

Just over a month after the popular revolution which ended direct monarchical rule, the Nepali Parliament has voted unanimously to emasculate their king, abolishing the concept of the "king in Parliament" and removing his ability to veto legislation and sign bills into law. Constitutionally, he is now an appendix, purely vestigal, a powerless, ceremonial figurehead - as all monarchs should be.

Nepal isn't officially a republic yet, but it is in all but name. It will be interesting to see how far they will go - whether they will prosecute the king for the murders carried out to defend his position, or be content with stripping him of all power.

A Nepali Magna Carta

First the revolution, now the constitution: Nepal's newly reinstated parliament has unanimously approved constitutional changes which will strip the king of his powers and reduce him to a ceremonial figure. The Nepalese army will be placed under the control of Parliament, the royal council will be scrapped, and the royal family will be forced to pay tax. It's being described as a Nepalese Magna Carta, and its certainly as groundbreaking as far as they're concerned. And this is only the beginning; the next step is a Constituent Assembly to consider wider constitutional questions, such as a republic.

Nepal's political parties (and even the Maoists) are absolutely united on this. What's unclear is whether the king will accept it. He'd be wise to - otherwise he's likely to find himself monarch only in name, and his "kingdom" limited to whatever hotel he ends up living in in exile.

More details at United We Blog: For a Democratic Nepal.

People power in Nepal

Convinced that the source of State Authority and Sovereignty of the Kingdom of Nepal is inherent in the people of Nepal and cognizant of the spirit of the ongoing people’s movement as well as to resolve the on-going violent conflict and other problems facing the country according to the road map of the agitating Seven Party Alliance, we, through this Proclamation, reinstate the House of Representatives which was dissolved on 22 May 2002 on the advice of the then Prime Minister in accordance with the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal-1990...

(Unofficial translation courtesy of United we Blog! for a Democratic Nepal).

The reinstatement of Parliament and representative government was one of the key demands of Nepal's Seven Party Alliance, so they seem to have won. But it wasn't all they were after; they are also seeking changes to the constitution to curtail the role of the king and put power firmly in the hands of elected government - and so far there seem to have been no concessions on that front. But the real question is whether after so much bloodshed and a clear demonstration that the king values his own status more than the lives of his people, this will really be enough any more.

Victory in Nepal?

After two weeks of protests and fourteen deaths, Nepal's self-proclaimed absolute monarch has seemingly backed down, saying that he will return power to the people of Nepal and inviting the opposition to nominate a Prime Minister. But while significant, the "backdown" was far less than what the opposition is seeking - there was no mention of elections or a constituent assembly, or a limitation of the King's role - and so it seems the protests will go on.

At this stage, there seems to be little King Gyanendra can do to retain power. His decision to murder his own people rather than restore democracy has caused a sea-change in public opinion; as the number of deaths has increased, the slogans being chanted have gone from "restore democracy" to "down with the monarchy" to "death to the king". Unless there's a total backdown and a retirement to the status of a mere figurehead, we may very well see Gyanendra having to flee his palace in a helicopter.

The end of Nepal's monarchy?

It has been two weeks since Nepal's political parties united to call for a general strike and protests against the King. During those two weeks thousands of people have taken to the streets to demand the restoration of democracy. The government's response has been to beat them, shoot them, and kill them. But bullets do not inspire love or build legitimacy, and the harsh security crackdown has not convinced people of the King's absolute right to rule. Instead, it has confirmed that he is the real problem - and so now the people are chanting "down with the monarchy", and Nepal is on the cusp of full-blown revolution.

Mass-protests are scheduled for tomorrow in what is intended to be a final push to oust the king. It might work, or it might take a few days more - but one thing is clear: King Gyanendra's legitimacy is in tatters, and he is on the way out. The only thing that remains to be seen is whether he goes quietly, or whether Nepal's revolution - relatively peaceful so far - descends into the usual bloodbath.

More information can be found at United We Blog! for a Democratic Nepal.

They're shooting them over there

Fourteen months ago, Nepal's King Gyanendra sacked his government and declared a state of emergency, suspending all basic human rights including the freedom of thought. Now, the Nepalese people have had enough. For the past six days, there have been mass protests across Nepal, backed by all political parties including the Maoist rebels. And the government's only answer is bullets. Two people were shot and wounded in Pokhara today, and another dozen in the capital Kathmandu. Three have been shot dead in as many days, hundreds wounded, and over a thousand jailed for daring to demand a return to democracy. But I don't really think this is going to do much to convince the Nepalese that their government is legitimate. At best all it can do is terrorise them into submission. Unfortunately, as far as governments are concerned, that's usually good enough.

What can we do? Unfortunately, not much. Nepal doesn't have an embassy in New Zealand to protest outside, or even an honorary consul to send messages to. As with Belarus, all we can do is wish the opposition luck and hope for the best.