Reminiscence of state terror in Nepal.(Critical essay)

Jitman Basnet. 2007. Andhyara 258 Dinharu (258 Dark Days), Kathmandu/Hong Kong: Advocacy Forum/ Asian Human Rights Commission, pp. 197, Photos, Documents. ISBN 978-99946-2-2-201-61, Price: NRs. 100.

Humans bear within themselves the mark of the inhuman ... their spirit contains at its very centre the wound of the non-spirit.

--Giorgio Agamben (1)

Much has been written about Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and even on Bagram prison camps where 'terrorist suspects' as 'enemy combatants' are kept without trial. In addition to this, the accompanying 'extraordinary rendition' programme has been disclosed as a mark of securitization of state in the US like the 'radical Islam' represented by the Al-Qaeda after 9/11 (2001) has saturated the imagination of the neocons in their quest for world domination under the guise of the 'gift of democracy'. The rendition programme is the classic case of the large scale use of torture and violence "committed with a terrifying world of endless interrogation, frequent transfer of prisoners round the world and detention without charge" (Gray 2007). The assertion of the concept of absolute state by President Bush in the American 'war against terrorism' has perpetuated unbridled state terrorism. The Bush Administration that has trampled the human rights of too many people other than its own is universally condemned for being horrendous. The Guantanamo was however under fire with the US Supreme Court ruling against the 'law free zone' and the judicial blockage imposed by the executive on the 45 sq. mile leased island from Cuba where the US has developed its naval base. The Supreme Court has ruled for granting habeas corpus rights to the detainees since 2004, which the government has been evading.

Lacerated by the unabated violence caused by the Maoist insurgency, Nepal had also taken lessons duplicitously following the US Patriot Act 2001 by adopting several stringent measures including declaration of national emergency suspending fundamental rights to the people and the anti-terrorist act with the provision of impunity. This led to a situation developing in Nepal in which the state was transformed to a repository of violence and terror. Towards this end, the Bhairavnath Battalion Military Barrack located at Maharajgunj had become the indefensible symbol of state terrorism in response to the threats of non-state terrorism. The men under arms become the active participants in the acts of arrest, detention, disappearances and denials of the citizens of state held incommunicado under the suspicion of being the Maoist terrorists. In the words of one of the victims, Himal Sharma, who had spent 26 nightmarish months inside the Bhairabnath Battalion Military Barrack, it was turned literally into a site for the 'human slaughter house'.

Like in the case of the US Supreme Court's inability to implement its rulings, its Nepali counterpart also faced stiff opposition from the military as well as the government authority whenever it raised the ante. Judiciary that had moved to examine the cases of illegal detentions was denied access and thus had' failed to uncover the cases of disappearances. Blatant disrespect of the court order and disregard of the law were observed in several cases as the persons released by the court were arrested within its premises without any warrant order. The country was reduced to the situation of lawlessness and anarchy by the state agencies actually responsible for preventing it. The tragedy however was that the judiciary had failed to successfully probe the cases of the "legality of arrests [even] of legal practitioners" by the security forces. As the INSEC 2004 reports,

 
   [T]he security forces [have] disobeyed, cheated, lied [to] the 
   Supreme Court on the information sought by it regarding the 
   whereabouts of many people. This sort of contempt of court must 
   immediately stop. The security agencies have downplayed the 
   spirit of rule of law, human rights and democratic system.... The 
   denial of the army to accepting letters issued by Supreme Court 
   and telling lies when asked about the whereabouts of people and 
   later releasing them from the army custody makes it look as if the 
   army is trying to bring the judiciary under its control (INSEC 
   2004).