NEPAL: ADVOCATING EXTENSION OF OFFICE OF THE HIGH

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 000147 SIPDIS SENSITIVE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL NO NP SUBJECT: NEPAL: ADVOCATING EXTENSION OF OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS (OHCHR) REF: KATHMANDU 0079 ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY. Heads of mission from Denmark, Germany, Britain, France, Finland, and the United States met Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Koirala February 18, 2010, to advocate for extension of the mandate of OHCHR beyond its current expiry in June 2010. Koirala suggested that the mandate was likely to be extended (perhaps a year, she later said privately) but seemed somewhat detached from the issue. After talking to the PM's office, she added that the government would ask for an unspecified change in (i.e. reduction of) the mandate. END SUMMARY ¶2. (SBU) The Danish Ambassador invited EU and US heads of mission to a planned meeting with Foreign Minister Sujata Koirala to present a unified stance in favor of extending the OHCHR mandate. The Dane led off with an impassioned critique of human rights in Nepal, with particular attention to the 156 "disappeared" in Bardiya District, most at the hands of the military and some by the Maoists. He said the international community did not seek an "automatic extension," but rather an agreement between the government and the UN on a set of benchmarks which, once met, would end the OHCHR mandate. He said the benchmarks - "an exit plan" - would set a certain level of observance of human rights which Nepal "had not yet achieved." ¶3. (SBU) The British Charge added that Nepal comes up for its universal periodic review in 2011 and the OHCHR office here would help Nepal through that process. ¶4. (SBU) The Danish Ambassador then spoke for his government alone, saying that the debate over international development assistance in Copenhagen would inevitably be influenced by the level of observance in Nepal of universal values especially including human rights. ¶5. (SBU) US Charge praised the non-partisan work of OHCHR and said that in addition to improving human rights for moral reasons, there could be more tangible benefits. Citing the Millennium Challenge Corporation, he said Nepal could be eligible for more substantial sums of assistance if and when the country improved its overall performance on governance, economic management, and human rights. ¶6. (SBU) Koirala responded tentatively, having demonstrated a seeming lack of familiarity with the Bardiya human rights issues. She said that she would be sitting down with the Prime Minister to discuss this and would get back to the envoys involved. She added that she hoped OHCHR would focus also on human rights abuses by organizations like the Maoists, Young Communist League. She then said that she thought the OHCHR's mandate would be extended by the government. She did not respond to the Dane's continued emphasis on benchmarks. ¶7. (SBU) Koirala later told the Charge and Pol/Econ chief that she thought the mandate was likely to be extended by a year. Any longer than that, she said, would invite criticism from others in government. She subsequently informed us that she had talked to an adviser in the PM's office and now realized that the mandate would have to be changed. She was not clear on what the change would involve, but it is sure to be a reduction in the office's authorities. ¶8. (SBU) Background Note: OHCHR is the UN's second largest human rights mission (after Columbia) with 98 national staff and 25 international employees in five offices throughout Nepal. It also has a broad mandate to enter police stations and prisons without notice, conduct investigations, and KATHMANDU 00000147 002 OF 002 advocate publicly for human rights. ¶9. (SBU) Comment: While Koirala's support for OHCHR,s mandate extension is a positive development, other forces in the Nepali government, including the military, will likely fight the extension and/or attempt to limit the scope of OHCHR,s mandate. Like UNMIN, OHCHR is perceived as biased toward the Maoists, and the Army in particular resents the constant pressure on conflict-era human rights abuses. We believe the negotiation over OHCHR,s mandate - both its length and scope - will be hard-fought and will not be resolved until the last minute (late May or even early June). CAMP