As Bernard Duhaime, the UN Special Rapporteur on Truth, Justice, Reparations and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, prepares to visit Nepal in June, a group of conflict victims has urged him not to lend legitimacy to the transitional justice commissions they have refused to accept.

In their letter, the insurgency-era victims have expressed deep lack of trust in the current leadership of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission for the Investigation of Enforced Disappearances of Persons, which they claim was appointed by bulldozing the selection process.

In a context where impunity is entrenched and state institutions are deeply politicised, any engagement or validation by the United Nations risks undermining years of advocacy by victims’ groups and civil society organisations, the victims have said.

“We urge you to call on the UN and the OHCHR to withhold endorsement and financial support for the commissions until they are formed through a credible, consultative process and legal provisions that fall short of international standards are revised,” reads the letter.

The appointment of chairpersons and members of the commissions in May 2025, carried out with limited consultation, is widely seen by victims as being based on political affiliation rather than merit and expertise.

Duhaime will conduct an 11-day visit starting June 9, meeting a wide range of stakeholders, including victims, government officials and civil society. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights said the purpose of the visit is to assess the measures adopted by the Nepali authorities in the areas of truth, justice, reparation, memorialisation, and guarantees of non-recurrence to address the serious human rights violations committed during the 1996-2006 Maoist insurgency.

“The visit will allow the Special Rapporteur to acquire a broad view of the good practices, gaps and shortcomings of the various initiatives taken since and formulate recommendations in that regard,” reads the high commissioner’s notice. Duhaime will present the report to the UN Human Rights Council in September 2027.

Even as the OHCHR had been requesting that the Nepal government allow the special rapporteur on truth, justice and reparations to visit since at least 2019, successive governments had ignored the request. The erstwhile Sushila Karki government had granted permission for Duhaime’s visit.

Around two decades since the Comprehensive Peace Accord, and over 11 years after the transitional justice process formally began, there has been no concrete progress in delivering justice to the thousands of victims of atrocities.

The transitional justice process that began in 2015 has failed to ensure accountability, establish the truth, or deliver meaningful reparations, the victims have said in the letter.

“Over the past 11 years, three sets of commissions have been formed, yet not a single case has been resolved,” according to the letter.

This record, they argue, reflects deep-rooted structural deficiencies that the current bodies are unlikely to overcome. Instead, there is growing concern that the process may entrench impunity and erode public confidence in the rule of law.

In response to these concerns, more than 330 victims from across the country filed a writ petition with the Supreme Court of Nepal in August 2025, seeking to nullify the appointments to the commissions and challenge provisions of the amended law. The petition argues that the selection process violated constitutional guarantees of independence and equality, and calls for a new, transparent, and participatory process involving public advertisement, open hearings, and objective criteria. However, the case remains pending, adding to the sense of uncertainty and frustration among victims.

A significant portion of the letter to the special rapporteur focuses on the plight of victims of conflict-related sexual violence, who, it says, have been treated with insensitivity by the current commissions. Although the amendment to the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act reopened the possibility of filing complaints related to such crimes, it imposed a restrictive three-month deadline that has already expired. Victims and civil society organisations have criticised this limitation as inconsistent with international law and judicial precedents.

Survivors of sexual violence had sought assurances from the TRC on issues of safety, confidentiality, and sensitivity before engaging with the complaint process, but their demands were rejected. As a result, many survivors chose not to file formal complaints, citing fears about confidentiality and the handling of their cases. In some instances, survivors’ groups registered only the number of cases rather than detailed complaints, reflecting a profound lack of trust.

Despite legal provisions recognising the right to reparations, including interim relief, no survivors of conflict-related sexual violence have received any form of redress to date. Many continue to face severe challenges in accessing medical care, psychosocial support, and assistance for children born as a result of rape, highlighting the gap between legal commitments and actual implementation.

Beyond these issues, the memorandum underscores the neglect of economic, social, and cultural rights within the transitional justice framework.

The letter seeks to ensure that the special rapporteur’s visit contributes to meaningful progress rather than inadvertently reinforcing a system that victims believe has failed them for years.