Summary

Non-signatory Nepal has not taken any steps to accede to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It has participated as an observer in one meeting of the convention, in 2013. Nepal abstained from voting on a key United Nations (UN) resolution promoting the convention in December 2020.

In October 2019, Nepal stated that it has never used, produced, or transferred cluster munitions and does not stockpile them.

Policy

The Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Nepal has never elaborated its position on joining the convention.[1]

Nepal participated in two meetings of the Oslo Process that created the convention, in Vienna in December 2007 and Wellington in February 2008. However, Nepal did not attend the Dublin negotiations in May 2008 or the Oslo Signing Conference in December 2008.

Nepal participated as an observer in the convention’s Fourth Meeting of States Parties in Lusaka, Zambia in September 2013. This remains its first and, to date, only participation in a meeting of the convention. Nepal was invited, but did not attend, the first part of the convention’s Second Review Conference held virtually in November 2020.

In December 2020, Nepal again abstained from voting on a UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution that urged states outside the Convention on Cluster Munitions to “join as soon as possible.”[2]

The Cluster Munition Coalition’s (CMC) national partner, the Nepal Campaign to Ban Landmines (NCBL), continues its outreach in support of the convention.[3]

Nepal is not party to the Mine Ban Treaty, nor is it party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

Nepal stated in 2009 and 2010 that it has never used, produced, or transferred cluster munitions, and does not stockpile them.[4] In October 2019, a government official told the Monitor that Nepal does not possess cluster munitions. [5]

Policy

The Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. In December 2010, Nepal stated that recommendations regarding accession to the Mine Ban Treaty would be completed “soon.”[1]

On 7 December 2020, Nepal abstained from voting on annual United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 75/52, calling for universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. Nepal has abstained from the vote every year since 2007, having previously voted in favor of each annual resolution on the treaty from 1996. In a June 2013 explanation of its abstention to the Nepal Campaign to Ban Landmines (NCBL), a Ministry of Foreign Affairs representative said that “The reason for abstaining in the UNGA resolutions may be that the participating teams may not be ‘well-informed’ in those matters.” The representative said he would send a message to the concerned authorities regarding future votes.[2]

Nepal has not attended a Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty since 2010 and did not attend the Eighteenth Meeting of States Parties, held virtually in November 2020.

The reason for Nepal’s inaction on acceding to the treaty remains unclear.

Previously, NCBL drafted an Article 7 report, in cooperation with the military, and submitted it to the former Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction (MoPR) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. NCBL requested that the government submit the voluntary report, but this did not occur. NCBL has consistently engaged key stakeholder ministries, which have contributed to awareness-raising and capacity-building on mine action via NCBL programs.

On 20 January 2021, NCBL submitted a letter to parliament speaker Agni Prasad Sapkota urging that accession to the Mine Ban Treaty be placed before parliament.[3] In June 2021, NCBL organized a special event about aspects of the national budget that related to persons with disabilities, to provide recommendations regarding services, facilities, and rights for survivors of landmines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs).[4]

During the past fifteen years, NCBL has received successive statements of support from ministers in the former MoPR, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Defence. It has organized events jointly with the former MoPR, such as the annual International Mine Awareness Day, on 4 April. In November 2016, Minister of Foreign Affairs Prakash Sharan Mahat told an NCBL delegation that he was one of the driving forces behind Nepal signing the Biological Weapons Convention, adding that he would lobby for accession to the Mine Ban Treaty and would contact the relevant ministries. However, he left office seven months later.[5] In March 2017, NCBL met with Tirtha Raj Wagle, Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who suggested organizing an interministerial discussion.[6] However, the former officials that NCBL engaged with were subsequently transferred, and no further progress has been made towards accession.[7]

Twenty-seven of Nepal’s political parties have signed an NCBL letter seeking accession to the treaty.[8] On 30 May 2019, NCBL met with two Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs officials, Secretary Rajib Gautam and Joint Secretary Phanindra Gautam. The Joint Secretary stated that he would look into starting the accession process. In May and June 2019, NCBL held further advocacy meetings on the Mine Ban Treaty with the president of the Parliamentary Committee of Law, Justice and Human Rights, with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and with the Foreign Secretary. In June 2019, NCBL also met with Dharma Raj Shahi, from the Officer Relief Department of the Ministry of Home Affairs, regarding victim support. He assured that survivors of landmines and IEDs were provided with assistance, as defined in government policy.

In May 2020, NCBL presented a request to the secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to participate in the virtual intersessional meetings of the Mine Ban Treaty. On 6 June and 3 August 2020, NCBL held follow-up meetings of parliamentarians on the formation of a parliamentary committee on the Mine Ban Treaty, coordinated by the former Law Minister. Subsequently, on 24 August 2020, NCBL encouraged and supported the virtual meeting of the “Parliamentary Forum against Landmines and IEDs,” which recommended that Nepal should join the Mine Ban Treaty and create a voice in parliament for assistance to survivors. The forum also urged the government to engage in dialogue with Communist Party of Nepal-Biplav faction to halt the use of explosive weapons and enter mainstream politics. On 15 August 2020, NCBL met with a former commander of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, to discuss the problem of IEDs and explosive remnants of war (ERW) in the post-conflict situation.[9]

Production

On 21 June 2010, Nepal told the Monitor that “Nepal does not produce any kind of antipersonnel landmines and the landmines that the Nepal Army is using have been produced abroad.”[10] Nepal repeated this at the Tenth Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in December 2010.[11]

Use, transfer, and stockpiling

The November 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) committed the government and the former Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist to halt the use of mines, and required the parties to assist each other to mark and clear mines and booby-traps.[12]

Nepal is not known to have ever exported landmines. In December 2009, the former MoPR stated that Nepal has not planted mines since the end of the insurgency in 2006, and that Nepal does not “enable the transfer” of mines.[13]

During the conflict, the Nepali Army used antipersonnel mines and IEDs, assembled in-country, around military installations, police posts, and infrastructure. The Nepali Army has stated that it started using landmines in 2002 and estimates that it deployed around 14,000 antipersonnel mines (11,000 PMD-6 mines, and 3,000 POMZ-2 and M14 mines). It estimates that it also used around 25,000 command-detonated IEDs.[14] In June 2010, Nepal told the Monitor that it used mines in 53 locations and IEDs in 275 locations during the conflict.[15] In June 2011, Prime Minister Jhalnath Khanal detonated the final mine, ending clearance of the areas mined by the Nepali Army during the civil war. He stated that “Today is a historical day because Nepal has been liberated from all kinds of landmines.”[16]

Nepal told the Monitor in June 2010 that it is now only using antipersonnel mines for training purposes. Nepal stated that “Landmines needed for this purpose have been retained in minimum number,” noting that this is in line with Article 3 of the Mine Ban Treaty.[17] The Nepal Police, the Armed Police Force, and the Nepali Army also retain stocks of IEDs.[18]

In 2007, a Nepali Army spokesperson stated that the army had a stockpile of about 3,000 antipersonnel and antivehicle mines, including POMZ-2 and PMD antipersonnel mines. Nepal imported mines from China, India, and the former Soviet Union, mostly in the 1980s.[19]

The former rebel Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist became a part of the interim government in April 2007, and led the government in 2008–2009, 2011–2013, and 2016–2017. There have been no reports of new use of antipersonnel mines, victim-activated IEDs, or booby-traps by any armed group within Nepal during the reporting period.

Victim assistance action points

• Establish a victim assistance coordination mechanism.
• Ensure the participation of mine/ERW survivors in the coordination and planning of victim assistance.
• Update the National Victim Assistance Strategic Framework and implement it.
• Strengthen the capacity of the Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction to fulfil its mandate to assist conflict-related victims.
• Conduct a national needs assessment survey.
• Ensure that healthcare services reach people in need living in remote areas.
• Develop physical rehabilitation services and improve access to assistive devices
• Develop psychological services and provide increased socio-economic inclusion services.

Victim assistance planning and coordination

International commitments and obligations

Laws and policies

Disability issues fall under the 2016 disability action plan,[7] and the Disability Rights Act adopted on 6 August 2017.[8] The Disability Rights Act provides equal access to education, health, employment, public physical infrastructure, or transportation and prohibits discrimination based on disability.[9]

The Nepalese constitution prohibits discrimination based on disability and guarantees the right to free higher education for citizens with physical disabilities who are “financially poor.” However, laws and regulations to improve rights and benefits for persons with disabilities are not fully effective.[10]

In January 2018, a demand paper was being drafted by the Conflict Victims Common Platform, calling for short- and long-term livelihood programs, rehabilitation of the displaced, employment for the victims, free education for the victims’ children, and free health services.[11]

The government provided monthly social security allowances for persons with disabilities. However, NGOs reported that little progress had been made regarding a 2012 Supreme Court order that the state do more for persons with disabilities.[12]

Major developments in 2017-2018

The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) reported that current government programs in support of persons with disabilities were not sufficient.[13] In 2017, it was reported that no specific actions were implemented by relevant national authorities to support mine/ERW survivors.[14] The MoPR is responsible for the financing of mine action and assisting conflict-related victims. However, its ability to fulfill this role was constrained by a high staff turnover in recent years.[15]

Needs assessment

No comprehensive assessment of the needs of mine/ERW survivors in Nepal has been conducted in recent years.[16] A lack of general, accurate data on the situation of persons with disabilities in Nepal was reported, making it difficult to assess the precise needs of persons with disabilities.[17]

The next national census will occur in 2021.[18] Statistics from the 2011 census and the National Federation for the Disabled were reported not to have included comprehensive data on the number of persons with disabilities as a result of conflict.[19]

Medical care and rehabilitation

Primary healthcare services in Nepal remained largely inaccessible to persons with disabilities living in remote areas.[20] Government healthcare services were limited to emergency care and very basic needs.[21] Moreover, many public places, including district-level and community-level health infrastructures, were not accessible.[22]

In 2017, the ICRC trained medical professionals in weapon-wound surgery and emergency-room trauma care.[23] Local actors were also trained in first-aid.[24]

The Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare (MoWCSW), the Ministry of Health and Population, and the MoPR were responsible for caring for persons with disabilities and for the provision of physical rehabilitation.[25] However, for regular physical rehabilitation most persons with disabilities relied on services funded through international assistance.[26] Access to assistive devices in Nepal was limited. There was no national manufacturing and distribution programs of such devices, and they continued to be mainly supplied by international and national NGOs.[27] In rural areas, there was a lack of technical knowledge for fitting of assistive devices.[28] Although there was no discrimination in terms of treatment received, civilians receiving rehabilitation services in military hospitals had to pay for their treatment, while militaries received treatment for free.[29]

The ICRC supported two physical rehabilitation centers with raw materials and equipment. It covered costs for devices, treatment, transport and/or accommodation for over 1,000 destitute people and supported partner organizations physical rehabilitation awareness outreach activities.[30] In 2016, Humanity & Inclusion (HI, formerly Handicap International) supported five rehabilitation centers, providing technical support, supporting the organization of mobile rehabilitation camps, supporting the identification and referral of persons with disabilities needing corrective surgery, and enhancing the sustainability of rehabilitation centers.[31] HI informed patients, including mine/ERW survivors, of their rights and referred them to relevant services.[32] The NCBL collected information about persons with disabilities’ needs for mobility devices, such as wheelchairs and sticks, and provided them with the appropriate, second-hand devices. The NCBL also supported survivors coming to Kathmandu for prosthesis fitting or repair, by providing shelter as well as money for food and transportation.[33]

Building sustainability within the rehabilitation centers remained a priority.[34] In 2017 the physiotherapy unit of the Bir Hospital in Kathmandu was handed over to the Ministry of Health.[35] HI ran a nine-year (2010–2019) funded by USAID to improve the quality, access, and sustainability of rehabilitation services.[36]

Led by the MoPR and the National Disabled Fund (NDF), the project for the provision of physical rehabilitation services to conflict-affected persons with disabilities was extended in 2016 and again in 2017.[37]

Socio-economic and psychosocial inclusion

Although the government mandates that each district allocates 15%of its budget for vulnerable groups, including persons with disabilities, most persons with disabilities had to rely almost exclusively on family members for assistance.[38] Municipalities allocated resources for income-generating activities.[39]

HI provided resources for skill training for livelihood activities for persons with disabilities, including civil war veterans.[40] HI also requested that microfinance institutions provide loans to persons with disabilities, including mine/ERW survivors.[41] The NCBL continued to support education for child survivors and other children with disabilities.[42] The NCBL also maintained its support to the National Network of Mine Victims, an informal survivor peer support network in 42 of the 77 districts of Nepal.[43] The NCBL conducted a livelihood and skill development program for survivors and other persons with disabilities and conducted a follow-up of the program.[44]

The NCBL provided some informal counseling in conjunction with other activities, such as encouraging survivors to participate in social, political, and economic activities.[45] HI continued to provide basic psychological support to persons with disabilities, though social workers.[46] Psychological assistance was reported to be almost non-existent outside of Kathmandu.[47]

The ICRC, along with partner organizations, promoted the social inclusion of persons with disabilities through sports.[48]

Victim assistance providers and activities