In Conversation with Gita Rasaili
her journey and advocacy as a human rights defender in nepal
Interviewed by Ruby Jensen
TW: This article discusses forms of trauma, including sexual assault and violence.
Gita Rasaili, Vice Chairperson of the Conflict Victim Women National Network (CVWN) and a representative of Nepal’s marginalised Dalit community, shared her story of her childhood, her family’s suffering during the conflict, and her work as a human rights defender seeking justice for victims.
PBI UK spoke to Gita when she was visiting the UK working on gaining international support for victims of the conflict in Nepal, in light of the release of the report of the Independent Delegation of International Lawyers to Nepal: ‘Peace without Justice and Accountability? A caution against impunity in post-conflict Nepal’.
1. Could you begin by sharing a bit about yourself, your work, and why you’re here today?
I am from Nepal, born in a village in Kavre, near Kathmandu. Growing up, my childhood was full of questions about why people behaved differently towards me and why I was considered different.
In my school, there were no chairs and benches; we had a mat and used to sit and study. I was never allowed to fetch water myself from the teachers' room; it was always my friends who would get water for me. My friends used to make plans to stay overnight or study together at their houses. I was never made part of those plans, and at the time, I never understood why. Only later did I realise that I was actually not allowed to go into their homes.
This separation puzzled and hurt me deeply, especially the rules around water. I wondered why I couldn’t go near the communal water tap or touch certain items. One day, driven by curiosity and the need to understand, I decided to test the limits. While walking home from school, I touched a water pot, wondering if anything terrible would happen to the family it belonged to, as I had been led to believe. I worried that my touch might somehow cause harm. But the next day, everyone in the household was fine. I continued these small acts of defiance for about a month, gradually realising that nothing bad happened because of my touch.
This realisation was empowering. Slowly, I started fetching water myself at school and using the public tap without asking for help or permission. I learned to defend myself if questioned, and with each small act, I grew more confident. Over the next six or seven years, these experiences shaped my resilience and determination to fight for my right to be treated equally. I began standing up against the barriers placed before me, and through these challenges, I developed a strong sense of leadership, which grew out of my desire to challenge and change the discrimination I faced.
The reason I am sharing these stories is to provide an understanding of what my village was like at that time. Although some people were aware, there was deep-rooted discrimination and a significant lack of education.
Because there was so much discrimination in my village, there was also significant influence from the Maoists to fight these inequalities. Perhaps because we believed in what the Maoists were after—bringing equality and fighting injustice—my family, including myself, were influenced towards that way of thinking.
In my village, there were few people who were not Maoist. Even my brother was Maoist from a very young age. Within a year of joining, he got killed. With my brother being killed, the Royal Nepal Army realised that our family is a Maoist family, so we were targeted a lot. Sometimes they would just take my father and torture him. They also started targeting my older sister.
Twenty years ago, my sister, who was studying in grade seven, was abducted at midnight. She was tortured in front of my parents, gang raped for the whole night, before being killed the next morning. That same night my father and brother-in-law were also tortured. Another girl who lived in a house nearby, was also killed in a similar way as my sister. So that morning there were two dead bodies of girls who had died under similar circumstances.
I realise now that the crimes committed by the army that night was basically to show us that if you or your family members are affiliated to Maoism in any way, this is the result, this is the consequence.
My sister was innocent, she was merely a student in the village. After my sister's murder, there was not a single day when my mother knew what was going on- she was completely in shock and could not process what had happened.
With my family members being killed, we did not know for whom justice should be fought, or for how long. We did not know whether to continue to fight for justice or save ourselves.
In 2006, when the Peace Accord concluded in Nepal, we did not know what transitional justice meant or what the process for justice was. We thought that this is conflict, this is armed conflict; it was normal, maybe, to be killed. We did not know that these kinds of cases could be prosecuted or that we could actually fight for justice.
Then I realised that there has never been a rule that says that if my sister is raped and killed, the conflict will be over. There is no rule that one needs to rape and kill people to win a war or end a conflict. That is when I understood that what happened to my sister was and is wrong. I think that gave me a very strong sense of belief. I became stronger and aware that I need to do something about it.
My father was the first person to initiate the legal procedure and start the case to fight for justice. When I grew up, I took over.
2. Can you expand a bit more about your work with other victims of the conflict?
During the fight for justice, I have met so many people.
There is another human rights activist from Kathmandu whose husband was killed by Maoists. So even if we were working together [in programmes], there was a certain distance between us because of the political ideologies. There was some animosity.
We participated in many programmes together, and gradually, a connection grew. We realised that, at the end of the day, it is simply pain. This relationship between the two victim groups represents the wider communities and people affected by the conflict.
Both sides, those fighting human rights violations by the state and those by the Maoists, have different approaches [to the pain]. But we realised that pain is similar and universal, so we built unity amongst these two groups of victims. We believe that unified voices from these two sets of victims will have a greater impact and the government will acknowledge it more.
We met so many people who were impacted by similar issues. With this, we were able to create a unified network. Sometimes we went to court, other times we took matters to the streets. There was unity among the victims. We started to build a network to bring people together in this effort.
Gita speaking at the launch of the fact-finding report ‘Peace without Justice and Accountability? A caution against impunity in post-conflict Nepal’ in London
3. Despite the new transitional justice legislation that passed earlier this year (August 2024) in Nepal, what are some barriers that still remain for victims?
In this Act, there are reforms compared to the earlier versions. For example, they have recognised reparation as a victim’s right and have classified Conflict-related Sexual Violence (CSRV) as a grave human rights violation. This is a good improvement compared to the previous version.
The Act states that there would be no escape from liability if it is a serious human rights violation. However, if it is not categorised as such, perpetrators can claim only 25 percent of the liability. For example, if you are sentenced to 10 years in jail, you only have to serve 2.5 years.
Despite CRSV being categorised as a serious violation of human rights, the reason for this is that there won’t be any proof of CRSV cases. So, even if victims claim the full 100 percent of the punishment for CRSV as a serious human rights violation, the lack of proof will prevent this in practice.
In addition, despite categorising CRSV as a serious human rights violation, they have not expanded as to how they will be conducting the process. What about the security and the confidentiality of the victims? The legislation lacks this explanation.
In this Act, they have named non-civilians as victims, which includes ex-combatants and former army members. With this group of victims included, the polls will favour the government and the state. For example, if there were 60,000 victims before, and now including the ex-combatants, there are 80,000 victims, the majority will say they just want reparations and not prosecution. This makes it seem that more victims are in favour of reparations. That is why they have added former army members to the victims category.
Lastly, when creating the Act, the government consulted certain male victim leaders with political affiliations. Despite being on this journey for twenty years, we were not asked or included in the legislative process. But because the government consulted these male victim leaders, they could ‘tick a box’ without including us.
“As victim leaders, we now need to make sure that the Transitional Justice Act is victim friendly. ”
4. What gives you the motivation and hope to continue with this work? What is the way forward for transitional justice in Nepal?
Sometimes I get frustrated and tired, and I think, what am I doing with my life? Is this all? But then I am taken back to that day twenty years ago; to what happened with my sister. With that incident I recall the trauma and the pain that me and my family went through. That moment does not let me give up.
Because I am the one who could speak about it, I have met other families who have come to me and said “you are my hope”. They have seen my leadership skills. This appreciation has also motivated me. The motivation I get from victims' families.
Right now, with the Transitional Justice Act being passed and the fact that we were not given recognition or asked to be part of the process, and when international communities like the UN make statements saying they welcome the Act, I had to question myself again; what am I doing? How come we were not recognised in this whole process after fighting for justice for so long, for more than twenty years?
Having said that, at this moment right now, transitional justice is also an opportunity. There are positive aspects in the Act, but this is the moment to question the things that are not OK in the legislation and consider what should be done next. I feel this is also an opportunity to take action.
As victim leaders, we now need to make sure that the Transitional Justice Act is victim friendly. To do this, we need to bring other victim leaders together, to collaborate and to make the process victim-centred.
5. What role can the international community, including the UK, play in supporting your work and that of other human rights defenders?
At this point, if international communities are planning to assist and be part of the transitional justice process, they should ensure it aligns with what the victims have to say and that it is victim-friendly. Even regarding reparations, the international community should check whether the reparations are suitable for the victims. Providing assistance without ensuring the victims' needs are met won't be victim-friendly.
In this process, the government will surely create sub-committees, for example at the community and ground levels. It needs to be certain that these committees include a number of female victims and representation from marginalised groups. The international community should look into whether the committees formed by the government include female victims and those from marginalised communities.
Similarly, with the amended Transitional Justice Bill, when forming recommendation committees for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission on Enforced Disappearances, the government should prioritise appointing commissioners who represent victims' groups and have relevant experience and qualifications. Victims are not only seeking justice for their own cases; they have become human rights defenders advocating for broader accountability. Their direct participation in these commissions is crucial, as they bring unique perspectives, insight, and dedication to investigating and addressing issues faced by others.
There will be international communities focusing on reparations and others on technical aspects. However, there should also be assistance from international communities in terms of monitoring, implementation, and observation of the transitional justice process. For that, there should be a strong network of civil society members and victims to monitor whether everything is being carried out properly.
Lastly, if the international community plans to bring experts, for example, those who have worked on Nepal for the OHCHR 2012 report (The Nepal Conflict Report), it should be ensured that these experts know Nepal very well.
If Gita’s story has inspired you to take action, here are some easy ways that you can help:
You can help us continue to support Gita and other brave human rights defenders by donating to PBI UK today.
Read and share the report, ‘Peace without Justice and Accountability?’. More information and the full report can be found here.
Take 10 minutes to write to your MP and ask them what they are doing to ensure the UK government supports human right defenders, and to ensure a victim-centred approach to transitional justice in Nepal. You can find your local MP here and use our email template here.
You can also sign up for our quarterly newsletter to learn about additional opportunities to support threatened human rights defenders in Nepal and globally.
