Mine ban policy overview

Policy

The Republic of Nepal has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. The November 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) committed the government and the Unified Communist Party of Nepal/Maoist[1] rebels to halt the use of mines, and required the parties to assist each other to mark and clear mines and booby-traps.[2] In June 2011, Prime Minister Jhalnath Khanal detonated the final mine, ending clearance of the areas mined by the Nepal Army during the civil war. He stated, “Today is a historical day because Nepal has been liberated from all kinds of landmines.”[3]

In February 2010, the Minister of Peace and Reconstruction initiated a ministerial-level committee to study the responsibilities of and opportunities for becoming a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.[4] The committee has representation from the ministries of home affairs, foreign affairs, defense, law, and justice, and the Nepal Campaign to Ban Landmines (NCBL). In December 2010, Nepal informed the Meeting of States Parties that the recommendations regarding accession to the Mine Ban Treaty would be completed soon.[5]  As of June 2011 a report by the Study Committee had not been able to compile a report due to the frequent change in personnel holding the position of Minister in the Ministry of Home Affairs and Defense during the time period.[6]

Nepal sent an observer delegation to the Tenth Meeting of States Parties in Geneva in November–December 2010, but not the intersessional meetings in June 2011. The representative of Nepal stated at the meeting, “Our endeavors are in line with the antipersonnel mine ban convention, Nepal is fully committed to the humanitarian objectives of the convention and we are always in favor of a mine free world.”[7]

On 8 December 2010, Nepal abstained from voting on UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 65/48 calling for universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. This was the fourth consecutive year that Nepal abstained on the annual resolution, after voting in favor of all previous pro-ban resolutions since 1996.[8]

In January 2011, the NCBL organized an Interaction Program on the Status of Nepal on Universalization of the Mine Ban Convention, chaired by the Minister of Peace and Reconstruction with presentations on actions towards a ban on mines by the Nepal Army, the Nepal Police and the Nepal Armed Police Force, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, UNICEF, the ICBL, and NCBL. In January 2011, a representative of the Ministry of Law and Justice presented NCBL with a draft of the country’s new penal code, which provides penal sanctions for use of mines.[9] In May 2011, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs stated, in a meeting with the NCBL, that Nepal should join the Mine Ban Treaty, and stated he would discuss accession with the other line ministries.[10] In May and June, NCBL met with the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the Defense Minister, and the Minister for Peace and Reconstruction to encourage accession to the Treaty. A rapid change of ministers (four new ministers in the key ministries of Peace and Reconstruction and Home Affairs since last year) has led to a continual introduction of the issue to government officials. NCBL launched a letter of commitment to spur Parliamentary action, which pledges political parties to work toward Nepal’s accession to the Treaty. In June 2011, an ICBL delegation met with the Ambassador of Nepal in Geneva and urged Nepal to remain engaged with the convention and consider submitting a voluntary Article 7 report. As of 1 September 2011, 24 of Nepal’s political parties have signed the letter to seek Nepal’s accession.[11]

Production

In December 2009, the Minister for Peace and Reconstruction told States Parties at the Second Review Conference that Nepal does not produce mines.[12] On 21 June 2010, Nepal wrote to 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.”[13] Nepal repeated this in its remarks to States Parties in December 2010 at the Tenth Meeting of States Parties.[14] In light of these official, written declarations that Nepal does not produce antipersonnel mines, the Monitor removed Nepal from its list of producers.

Previously, in 2003 and 2005, Nepali officials told the Monitor that Nepal produced antipersonnel mines.[15]

Use, transfer, and stockpiling

In December 2009, the Minister for Peace and Reconstruction told States Parties that Nepal has not planted mines since the end of the insurgency in 2006.[16] He also said that Nepal does not “enable the transfer” of mines. Nepal is not known to have ever exported mines.

Nepal wrote to the Monitor in June 2010 that it is now only using antipersonnel mines for training purposes. It stated, “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]

During the conflict, the Nepal Army used antipersonnel mines, as well as improvised explosive devices (IEDs) assembled in-country, around military installations, police posts, and infrastructure. The Nepal Army has stated that it started using mines in 2002, and estimates it deployed around 14,000 antipersonnel mines (including 11,000 PMD-6 mines and 3,000 POMZ-2 and M14 mines). It also estimates that it used about 25,000 command-detonated IEDs.[18]  In June 2010, Nepal told the Monitor that it used mines in 53 locations and IEDs in 275 locations during the conflict.[19] The Nepal Police, Armed Police Forces, and the Nepal Army retain stocks of these IEDs.[20]

In December 2008, General Rukmang Katwal, the army’s Chief of Staff, told an ICBL delegation that Nepal had never used mines on its borders, and could not conceive of a situation that might necessitate such use. He acknowledged that the few thousand mines in Nepal’s stockpile could hardly afford any protection.[21]

A Nepal Army spokesperson said in 2007 that the army had a stockpile of about 3,000 antipersonnel and antivehicle mines, including POMZ-2 and PMD antipersonnel mines. Nepal imported its mines from China, India, and the former Soviet Union, mostly in the 1980s.[22] 

Although the former rebel Communist Party of Nepal/Maoist (CPN/M) became a part of the interim government in April 2007, its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) still exists.[23] There have been no reports of new use of antipersonnel mines, victim-activated IEDs, or booby-traps by the PLA since the May 2006 cease-fire. In the past, the PLA was expert at the manufacture and use of a variety of IEDs, including victim-activated, time-delayed, and command-detonated types.[24] Other armed groups continue to operate within the country, and manufacture and use bombs. There is no evidence that any of them have used or possess antipersonnel mines.

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

Nepal has never made a public statement on its policy on joining the convention. In December 2009, the Minister of Peace and Reconstruction told the CMC that there are no issues preventing the government from acceding to the convention.[1]

Nepal participated in two meetings of the Oslo Process that created the convention (Vienna in December 2007 and Wellington in February 2008), but did not participate in Dublin negotiations in May 2008 or the Convention on Cluster Munitions Signing Conference in Oslo in December 2008, even as an observer. Nepal has shown limited interest in the convention since 2008. It was invited to, but did not attend, the First Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Vientiane, Lao PDR in November 2010.

Ban Landmines Campaign Nepal (NCBL) has undertaken several activities to promote the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[2]

Nepal is not party to the Mine Ban Treaty or the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

In June 2010, Nepal confirmed that it does not possess cluster munitions and has never used, produced, transferred, or stockpiled cluster munitions.[3]

Contamination and Impact

Nepal is affected by antipersonnel mines, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and other explosive remnants of war (ERW) as a result of a decade of conflict that ended with a peace agreement in November 2006.

Mines

Mine contamination when the conflict ended consisted of 53 fields of antipersonnel mines laid by the Nepal Army around military posts. By the end of 2010, clearance had reduced contamination to 17 minefields covering some 80,000m². In June 2011, the UN reported that clearance of all known minefields in Nepal had been completed.[1]

Improvised explosive devices and other explosive remnants of war

The decade of conflict has also resulted in an ERW problem, mainly IEDs. The Nepal Army, police, and Armed Police Force placed explosive devices, including command-detonated IEDs, as defensive perimeters around military installations. The police and armed police force have already cleared their IED fields. Of 270 IED fields laid by the Nepal Army that remained at the end of the conflict, 110 remained to be cleared at the end of 2010.[2]

Continuing violence by non-state armed groups, especially in the Terai region of southern Nepal, has led to additional IED use and new victims. According to UNICEF, of 41 casualties reported in the region in 2010, 36 (88%) were caused by victim-activated IEDs.[3]

Nepal also has a continuing problem with “socket bombs” (improvised hand grenades), which were produced in large quantities by Maoist supporters during the conflict and left in people’s houses after the conflict ended. Socket bombs accounted for seven of 22 incidents in 2010 but these incidents occurred in seven different districts. Other small improvised devices such as “Sutali bombs” (thread bombs) and “tiffin box bombs” also cause casualties.[4]

Mine Action Program

Key institutions and operators

The Steering Committee for Mine Action and its Mine Action Technical Committee serve as the NMAA. It created a mine action task force in October 2009 to make recommendations for future mine action and issued a draft national mine action plan. As of March 2011, the draft plan was still under consideration by the Steering Committee.[5]

NAMACC fulfills many of the functions of a mine action center, operating as a sub-unit command within the army. In October 2009, the MoPR set up a Mine Action Office to serve as a government focal point for mine action.[6] In addition, a MAJWG continues to support operational coordination, especially of mine/ERW casualty surveillance, RE, and victim assistance.[7]

The MAJWG, including representatives of government, security forces, UN agencies, the ICRC, and NGOs, was previously chaired by the members of the UN Mine Action Team (UNMAT)[8] but since August 2010 has been led by the MoPR.[9] Since October 2010, the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) has focused on quality assurance; it expected to end its activities in Nepal at the end of July 2011.[10]

Land Release

Nepal Army engineers cleared 16 minefields in 2010, slightly more than in 2009, but the area released totaled 1.6km², very substantially more than the area actually cleared, reflecting the large buffer zone included by the army within the fencing it installed around mined areas.[11]

Five-year summary of clearance[12]

N/R = Not reported

Mine clearance in 2010

The Nepal Army operated with three demining teams throughout 2010. A fourth demining team was trained in September 2010 but due to shortage of equipment it did not start operations until end January 2011.[13]

Mine clearance in 2010[14]

Safety of demining personnel

No demining accidents occurred in 2010.[15]

Other Risk Reduction Measures

UNICEF, the Nepal Red Cross Society, the Nepal Campaign to Ban Landmines (NCBL), the Informal Service Sector Center (INSEC), and other national NGOs were active in delivering RE to at-risk communities across the country.  In 2010, UNICEF and the Department of Education conducted RE in 1,100 schools targeting more than 380,000 children from the 20 most affected districts. UNICEF together with the Security Forces trained Nepal Police’s 12,000 staff members from 900 police stations, and Armed Police Force’s 11,117 staff members from 100 barracks in 25 most affected districts.[16]

Three waves of media campaigns comprising six public service announcement (PSA) spots and a documentary on “Mine Risk Education Heroes” have been broadcast through nine TV stations and 105 local and FM radios (in six languages). The PSA spots and documentary highlight the danger of explosive devices in Nepal, especially for children, and urge the general public to report information about these devices to local authorities. The campaigns were proposed through the MAJWG and endorsed by the MoPR.[17]

Casualties Overview

The Nepali, NGO Informal Service Sector Center (INSEC) recorded 41 mine and explosive remnants of war (ERW) casualties in 2010. For the first time in Monitor reporting, there were no fatalities among mine/ERW casualties in Nepal. Of the total casualties, 33 were civilians; the majority of civilian casualties (20, or over 60%) were children (12 boys; eight girls); most adult civilian casualties were women (seven) and six were men. In 2010, for the first time, security personnel were included in INSEC casualty data (seven police; one military personnel). Most casualties (34) occurred in incidents caused by unexploded or abandoned improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which were all recorded as various types of improvised hand grenades.[1] No deminer casualties were reported for 2010.[2]

This represented a significant decrease from the 70 civilian mine/ERW casualties reported by INSEC for 2009,[3] and follows the trend in recent years of a “steady and continuous reduction in the number of incidents and casualties in Nepal.”[4]

The total number of casualties in Nepal remained unknown. The Monitor identified 867 mine/ERW casualties (221 killed; 646 injured) between 2003 and 2010.[5] From 1999 to 2002, the Nepal Campaign to Ban Landmines (NCBL) reported 1,326 casualties (522 killed; 804 injured).[6] However, the NCBL figures were thought to include other conflict casualties.[7]

Victim Assistance

The total number of mine/ERW survivors in Nepal is unknown, but at least 646.

Assessing victim assistance needs

No comprehensive needs assessments were reported for 2010. Handicap International (HI) used INSEC’s casualty surveillance system to assess the needs of survivors, provide assistance, and monitor follow-up.[8] A HI personalized social support project also assessed the needs of individual survivors and persons with disabilities who were beneficiaries.[9] Information provided by INSEC was also used by the UN Mine Action Team (UNMAT) in Nepal to assist strategic and operational planning, including victim assistance.[10] The NCBL collected information on casualties and survivor needs.[11]

Victim assistance coordination[12]

Throughout 2010, victim assistance continued to be discussed in the meetings of the Mine Action Joint Working Group (MAJWG), an informal working committee that coordinates mine action activities including victim assistance, and includes government and UN agencies, NGOs, and the ICRC. The MAJWG was chaired by UNMAT (UNICEF and the UN Mine Action Service) until August 2010 when the chair role was taken over by the Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction (MoPR). [13] Five meetings were held in 2010.[14]

A five-year National Victim Assistance Strategic Framework was developed with the main victim assistance agencies under the leadership of the MoPR in August 2009. However the strategy was not yet being used as a framework for victim assistance activities by June 2011.[15] Victim assistance stakeholders had resolved to launch a specific Victim Assistance Working Group by November 2009.[16] However this had not eventuated by September 2011.[17]

The Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare, the Ministry of Health and Population, and the MoPR were responsible for caring for people with disabilities and for the provision of physical rehabilitation. However, most people with disabilities continued to rely on international organizations for regular physical rehabilitation. [18]

Survivor inclusion

No inclusion of survivors in planning or coordination was reported. Survivors were included in the implementation of victim assistance activities such as psychological support and advocacy through the NCBL’s informal National Network of Mine Victims.

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities in 2010[19]

In 2011, UNICEF reported that since 2005, almost all mine/ERW survivors, including 300 children, had received adequate and timely medical care and rehabilitation services when needed.[20] In 2009, a mine action evaluation reported that areas of victim assistance other than physical rehabilitation received “little or no attention.”[21] Few significant changes in the availability of other areas of victim assistance were reported, however some new socio-economic inclusion initiatives have been reported since 2009.

No significant improvement in accessibility of emergency medical care was reported. However support to the health sector increased to address increased demand due to a worsened security situation. In 2010, the ICRC provided medical supplies to 17 hospitals to help them cope with an influx of patients following unrest, compared to nine in 2009. ICRC also ran skills training courses for trauma-room specialists from 29 hospitals.[22] Ambulances continued to encounter obstruction and suffer damage during strikes and demonstrations; these services were maintained with ICRC support.[23]  In some cases new mine/ERW survivors who could not be treated in district hospitals could be flown to Kathmandu for emergency medical care.[24]

Although construction of a trauma center at Bir Hospital in Kathmandu was completed in 2008, the much-needed center was still not operational by mid-2011.[25]

The number of prostheses produced at the two ICRC supported centers increased significantly in 2010. This was likely due in large part to the ICRC’s support since 2009 of the Yerahity Rehabilitation Center managed by the Nepal Army.[26] Strong links between HI, the ICRC, and the Nepal Army for providing referrals and information sharing benefited mine/ERW survivors and other persons with disabilities. More generally rehabilitation centers faced challenges with sustainability. HI encouraged the relevant government institutions to take more responsibility for the financing of rehabilitation centers, with a view to eventually phasing out its support of rehabilitation centers.[27] Financial support will gradually be reduced over several years, although managerial and technical support will continue beyond that. The Government and, in particular, the Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare has shown a commitment to providing financial support to the existing centers that provide for services for persons with disabilities. Three HI-supported centers received funding from the ministry through June 2011. Similarly the MoPR has responsibility for providing rehabilitation services to victims of conflict.[28]

Psychological assistance was reported to be almost non-existent.[29] This remained true in overall in 2010, however, each community affected by a mine/ERW incident received emergency risk education, including psychological support aspects within a period of about 10 days after the incident.[30] The NCBL continued to provide some informal counseling together with other activities and supported the National Network of Mine Victims, an informal survivor peer support network, but lacked funds to expand the program or adequately identify and engage other survivors.[31] In November 2010, NCBL held an awareness-raising workshop for members of its National Network of Mine Victims and other survivors.  The network had members in 22 of Nepal’s 75 districts and NCBL had facilitators in 46 districts. The workshop included civilian mine/ERW survivors as well as former combatants from the Nepal Army, military police, national police, the non-state armed group People’s Liberation Army and people with disabilities from other causes. This was the first time that all these groups had come together.[32]

There were some newly reported initiatives for the social and economic inclusion of mine/ERW survivors and other persons with disabilities. The Nepal Red Cross Society ran a micro-economic program for victims of the conflict who lost mobility and the International Nepal Fellowship, in conjunction with Partnership for New Life, provided socio-economic inclusion and vocational training programs for people with physical disabilities.[33] UNICEF and its partners provided two-year education grants to 100 child survivors severely affected by mines/ERW. In addition, especially vulnerable families with the most affected child survivors (child survivors having grave or multiple disabilities) received a special grant for a family income-generating project.[34] NCBL reported success in its economic inclusion services for survivors, with nearly all beneficiaries maintaining their employment after a period of support.[35]

MoPR, UNICEF, HI, and the National Federation for Disabled Nepal disseminated a victim assistance handbook throughout Nepal (in 70 districts) to service providers, including health and physical rehabilitation centers, DPOs, human rights groups and Village Development Committees. The handbook was provided together with an orientation session. Monitoring of the handbook’s use indicated that it was used to improve understand what types of services are available, to learn about the rights of survivors, and to advocate for survivors’ rights.[36]

The government Conflict Victim Relief and Rehabilitation Program supports mine/ERW survivors. As part of Nepal’s peace process support program, a revised Procedure on Citizen’s Relief, Compensation and Financial Support was endorsed in 2010 by the MoPR that included specific provisions for mine/ERW survivors. It was not reported what the provisions were, but the procedure is used to allocate services such as health care as well as compensation.[37] However, more generally mine/ERW survivors did not receive adequate recognition of their needs because they represented only a small number of the people who by definition received rights as conflict victims, including many internally displaced persons. Procedures for receiving benefits and services as a mine/ERW survivor with a disability were often prohibitively complicated. These involved registering with two or three different ministries that lacked internal coordination procedures.[38]

Nepal has developed specific policies and laws regarding the rights of persons with disabilities, but most of them were not implemented.[39] Legislation mandates access to employment, education, transportation, and other state services for persons with disabilities. Discrimination against persons with disabilities continued to be reported in all the above areas.[40]

Nepal ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol on 7 May 2010.

In 2010, the government of Nepal did not report any contributions to its own mine action program.

In 2010, international contributions towards mine action in Nepal totaled $913,518.[1] The largest contribution was provided by the United States (US) ($500,000).

Of the total contribution, $779,316 (85%) went towards victim assistance (VA) activities, while the remainder was for clearance activities.

International government contributions: 2010[2]

In 2009–2010, Nepal received $1.75 million. A decline in funding is anticipated due to the fact that in June 2011, the UN reported that clearance of all known minefields in Nepal had been completed.[3]

Summary of international government contributions: 2006–2010[4]