by Binod Ghimire in The Kathmandu Post, Dec 7, 2023
Disputes among the commissioners within the National Human Rights Commission are not uncommon. In 2010-11, then commissioners Leela Pathak and KB Rokaya had a nasty feud that hampered the performance of the constitutional body.
Although it didn’t come to the public’s attention, there were serious differences among the office bearers in the previous team led by Anup Raj Sharma. On some occasions Sharma had criticised the activities of some of his commissioners without naming them.
History has repeated itself. A majority decision of the commission to recommend Murari Kharel for secretary has sparked differences among the commissioners in the public. Four of the five commissioners including the chief commissioner Top Bahadur Magar on October 30 asked the government to promote Kharel as secretary. He has been working as an acting secretary for around two years.
Three days later on November 3, Mihir Thakur, a commissioner, wrote a separate letter to Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal asking him to refrain from appointing Kharel as the secretary, accusing Kharel of misusing resources and engaging irregularities in the commission. Furthermore, he took to Facebook on Sunday saying Kharel needs to be sacked because he had protected an official accused of sexual harassment.
On the same day, commission officials padlocked Thakur’s chamber saying he had defamed the officials and the commission as a whole. “His office has been padlocked until he apologises for defaming the commission, its officer bearers and the officials,” reads the notice by the staff’s club in the commission. The commission has also strongly objected to Thakur’s act of making serious allegations against its staff.
Issuing a statement on Monday, Magar said, it is saddening that Thakur, in the name of right to expression, is spreading rumors with an intention to defame the officials in the commission. His act also contradicts the commission’s code of conduct, reads the statement.
The officials at the commission say Thakur, by nature, is very intimidating and wants everything he says to be implemented. “Our staffers don’t want to work with him. His personal assistants have been changed three times so far. Even drivers don’t want to drive his vehicle,” said a senior official at the commission. “It is natural that if there is no unanimity, and decisions are taken by the majority, but Thakur has a habit that what he says should be final.”
In addition to Magar, three other commissioners, Surya Dhungel, Manoj Duwadi and Lily Thapa, agreed to promote Kharel while it was only Thakur who stood against the promotion.
Thakur, however, says he is being cornered in the commission because he is voicing for the reforms in the constitutional body. “I don’t have anything personal with Kharel, but he doesn’t deserve to be its secretary,” he told the Post. “I will continue to fight to bring transformation in the commission.” Thakur also claimed that most of the officials in the commission are incapable, money-minded, and some are even morally corrupt.
However, Thakur himself has been accused of harassing his then daughter-in-law together with his wife and son. An official at the commission said the woman had even filed an email complaint to the commission against Thakur, although no investigation was done in the matter. “It is ironic that the person who is accused of harassment at his home is accusing others for being morally corrupt,” another official at the commission told the Post.
While Thakur accepted the allegation from his former daughter-in-law but rubbished it claiming baseless. Though he goes to office, the officials at the commission are not cooperating with him.
The internal feud within the constitutional human rights watchdog has surfaced just a month after it retained its global ‘A’ ranking from the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI). Its sub-committee on accreditation had recommended downgrading the commission, raising questions over the appointments of the office bearers.
The Constitutional Council led by then-prime minister KP Sharma Oli had nominated chairpersons and members to various constitutional bodies, including the NHRC, based on a revision to the Constitutional Council Act enforced through an ordinance on December 15, 2020. After the Council’s nominations, then President Bidya Devi Bhandari on February 3, 2021 appointed the chair and four commissioners to the NHRC. They were appointed without going through parliamentary hearings in the absence of the House of Representatives.
Over half a dozen writ petitions challenging the ordinance and the appointment process are sub judice in the Supreme Court. The hearing on the petitions slated for Wednesday has been deferred.
Tika Ram Pokharel, spokesperson at the commision, said the feud would be resolved soon. “It would have been better if the differences were not spilled in public. However, this can be settled through dialogue,” he told the Post. “Discussions are going on to resolve the matter.”
https://kathmandupost.com/national/2023/12/07/rights-watchdog-grapples-with-internal-feud-yet-again
