Views of a Nepali Economist

The following opinion piece was published on October 14, 2015 in Republica. The direct link is here.

The 2015 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded this week to the Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet, a group of four institutions. If we recall, the Arab Spring movement started in Tunisia in 2010, and spread rapidly throughout the Arab world, in the Middle East and Africa. As a result, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen saw an end to decades of dictatorial regimes. However, in the aftermath of the revolution, Tunisia almost faced a civil war due to social unrest and political assassinations. Formed in 2013, the Tunisian Quartet played the role of a mediator to transition Tunisia into a pluralistic democracy.

Although the award recognizes the Tunisian Quartet, it is a source of pride for mediation practitioners and supporters all over the world. The Nobel Prize validates the countless hours/days/years of contribution that mediators throughout the world—including in Nepal—have made in search of peaceful resolution to conflicts.

Nepal has a rich history of traditional dispute resolution, and most Nepali communities have their own dispute resolution systems. Most such systems make use of mediation. For thousands of years now, we have been a culture that seeks third-party mediation to resolve our disputes. As a result, Tharus have their badghar system, Sherpas have khada yangza, Thakalis have mukhiya system, and the Muslim communities have anjuman system. But, as the examples suggest, these traditional systems cater to a homogeneous group of people. As Nepali society becomes more modern, heterogeneous, and urban, these traditional systems have started to break down.

However, there have been efforts to ensure that despite the loss of traditional systems, Nepalis continue to have access to mediation for dispute resolution. Many local and international organizations have been working tirelessly to preserve and promote the culture of mediation in Nepal. In 1999, the UNDP's Access to Justice program started providing mediation training to traditional dispute settlers in several districts. DFID continues to partner with HUCODAN, a local NGO, in ten districts to run a mediation program for village-level dispute settlement.

There is more. JICA supports the COMCAP mediation program in Sindhuli and Mahottari. DANIDA/HUGOU runs mediation programs in four districts. PACT/SAJHEDARI project runs a program in six districts. The Asia Foundation supports mediation programs in 12 districts. It is not just NGOs and INGOs that support and run mediation programs. Even the Nepali courts have the Court-referred Mediation program.

In addition to these local level programs, there are mediation programs at the regional level to resolve regional disputes. UNDP supports one such program. The Asia Foundation's Regional Dialogue program in Jhapa and Dang/Banke resolves regional conflicts—anything from local governance to natural resource sharing issues—through informal dialogues between stakeholders. At the national level, there are several mediator groups.

One such group was able to broker an agreement between various political parties to pave way for the Maoists to come out of hiding and be recognized as a legitimate political force to contest in the 2008 CA election. Several mediators worked tirelessly through the first and the second Constituent Assembly to broker understandings on several constitution-related issues between opposing groups.

So, why is mediation so popular in Nepal? Informal mediation is popular with national leaders because it allows them to forge agreements outside the public view. The thinking goes that in public view (in the parliament and the media), a politician of one stripe cannot be seen agreeing and supporting the opponent's views and suggestions. At the village-level, informal mediation is extremely popular because villagers in remote Nepal have to endure days of travel to reach district courts, significant monetary costs in filing and fighting a case, and days/months of wait for decisions from the judges.

It is a costly affair for somebody in a rural remote village in Nepal to access formal justice system. As a result, mediation programs that offer their services at almost no cost and within the village have become extremely popular in Nepal, even in many cities.

Despite the success, not everything is right with mediation programs in Nepal. First, mediation programs run by different organizations have different success rates. The Asia Foundation's mediation program boasts a dispute resolution rate of over 85 percent, other similar donor organizations' resolution rates are lower, and the Court-referred Mediation program has a resolution rate of only 20 percent. Second, many donor organizations compete in launching mediation programs in the same districts, often in the same villages. That is counterproductive, and a waste of resources—both capital and human.

Third, differing curriculum and training practices has meant that mediators in some organizations are better trained than others. That results in varying qualities of services that the program users receive. Fourth, various government agencies—such as the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD) and the Ministry of Law and Justice (MoLJ)—are in a tussle to see who gets most mediation programs in Nepal under their umbrella. This struggle is partly for access to millions of dollars in mediation program funding and partly for grandstanding that comes with taking ownership of a successful program.

The point is: there are several issues in mediation programming that need fixing. However, Nepal's mediation programmers—local NGOs and donor agencies—have to be commended for their relentless effort in promoting mediation. For example, their efforts ensured that the Nepali state recognizes the resolutions achieved through informal mediation. That recognition came through the Mediation Act, which came into effect on April 14, 2014. The Act now provides legal validity to resolution agreements signed by disputing parties in informal mediation programs.

There have been significant efforts, both by government and non-government mediation supporters, to ensure mediation practices and programming in Nepal continue to improve and deliver. The Mediation Council, housed in the Supreme Court, is tasked with implementing a standard curricula and training for all mediation practitioners in Nepal. The new Act also gives the Council the responsibility to draft mediation-related rules and regulations. Some donors have recognized the need to pool their resources and knowledge together. For example, the UK, Swiss, and Danish governments have formed a "Governance Facility" to pool their resources and run mediation and other peace-building programs together in Nepal.

Mediation programming in Nepal has come a long way. Particularly in the last 15 years, a lot has been achieved. Yet a lot more still needs to be done. Let us hope the 2015 Nobel Prize to a group of mediators buoys the confidence and stamina of Nepali mediators for many years to come.

Labels: community mediation, conflict, mediation, Mediation Council, Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet