An Applicant’s Path to the United Nations Human Rights Committee
Begin Your Justice Journey
Justice Journey is an interactive digital experience that invites
you to walk the long, uncertain path to justice taken by survivors
of serious human rights violations in Nepal including cases of
extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and
conflict-related sexual violence.
Inspired by 28 real-life cases submitted to the UN Human Rights
Committee* (2006-2018). This experience guides you through digital
stations that mirror the justice process from the moment of
violation, through domestic legal struggles, international appeals,
and recommendations by HRC for implementation to Nepal
government.
As you walk each step, you encounter the systemic delays, denials,
and bureaucratic barriers that survivors continue to face. The
journey ends not with resolution, but with the weight of waiting. A
question that lingers: What does justice look like when the system
remains silent?
*UN Human Rights Committee (UN HRC): The UN Human Rights
Committee (HRC) is a body of 18 independent experts who monitor
the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR). The Committee was established
under the First Optional Protocol (OP1) to the ICCPR, which gives
it the power to receive and examine individual complaints (also
known as “communications”) from individuals who claim their rights
under the ICCPR have been violated. Nepal ratified both the ICCCR
and the First Optional Protocol on 14 May 1991. By doing so, it
agreed to uphold the rights enshrined in the Covenant and to
provide an effective remedy for any violations. To date, the
Human Rights Committee has adopted 29 decisions (also called
"Views") on individual complaints filed against Nepal. These
decisions represent international findings on whether Nepal failed
to meet its human rights obligations and what steps it must take
in response (also known as “recommendations”).
Reflect on Justice
Follow the scroll cue to continue, reflecting on the question: Where does justice begin?
The Violation
You are stepping into the experience of someone affected by serious
human rights violations. Select the form of harm they endured to begin
their journey through the harm they faced and the justice they sought.
Seeking Justice at Domestic Avenues
The following case narrative shows how families and survivors pursued
justice through domestic mechanisms like courts, commissions, and
police where they only face silence, denial, or delay at every step.
Extrajudicial Killing
Two children killed on their way to school
They were intercepted by security forces, beaten, and killed. The
officers forced local villagers to bury the body in secret. The
family learned of the killing through rumors and a radio
broadcast. They performed funeral rituals themselves, without any
autopsy and without the investigation. Then came to find the
facts of the killing of their Son.
Justice Pursuit at Domestic Avenues Timeline
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
a complaint was filed; no reply was received
District Court
compensation claim rejected; the killing was not recognized
under the law
Appellate Court
upheld the decision, offering no further remedy
District Police Office
refused to register a First Information Report (FIR)
Court
issued a mandamus order to compel police to register the
FIR
Police
ignored the court order
Court
issued a second order, calling the refusal unlawful
Police
continued to resist, offering no clear explanation
Contempt of Court petition
filed by the family
Police (finally)
claimed the FIR had been registered but no further
investigation was followed
Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)
a complaint was submitted
Aftermath
No officers were questioned.
No reparation was provided for the victims.
CLOSED WITHOUT ACTION IN DOMESTIC AVENUES.
Enforced Disappearance
Mr. A: Taken by the Security Forces
Mr. A was taken by plainclothes security forces in broad daylight.
Witnesses saw a white-andgreen army van. He was detained at a
nearby army barracks. He was interrogated and held incommunicado
(cut off from the outside world).
When his family tried to see him, they were turned away. Later,
they were told he had “escaped” and drowned while on patrol.
Though he had never been charged, never presented in court, never
seen again.
The family knocked on every door:
Justice Pursuit at Domestic Avenues Timeline
District Police Office
First Information Report was not filed for the missing
person; was not offered any help
Chief District Officer (CDO)
said no information could be shared due to the
emergency
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
received their complaint
Civil society groups
issued Urgent Actions to raise alarm
Supreme Court
the family filed a habeas corpus petition
Supreme Court
The Court asked the government to explain. The CDO repeated
the drowning story. The Home Ministry claimed Mr. A was never
in custody
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court closed the case, saying there was no need
to pursue it further. Mr. A had supposedly drowned
Aftermath
No body was recovered.
No one was held accountable.
The family is waiting either for his breath or the body.
CLOSED WITHOUT ACTION IN DOMESTIC AVENUES.
Conflict-related Sexual Violence
Ms. I: Sexual Violence in Detention
Ms. I was arrested by members of the Royal Nepalese Army in her
village. She was detained at army barracks, where she was raped,
sexually abused, tortured, and forced to confess.
Later, she was held in inhumane conditions at an Armed
Police Force battalion with a friend, subjected to repeated sexual
violence, constant interrogation, verbal abuse, and forced labor.
She and her friend were released on condition that they report
back on Maoist activities.
The family of Ms. I sought answers through every possible channel:
Justice Pursuit at Domestic Avenues Timeline
Chief District Officer (CDO)
complaint filed about arbitrary detention and
mistreatment
District Police Office
refused to register the First Information Report(FIR) as it
did not comply with the 35-day statute of limitation for
reporting the crime of rape
Supreme Court
writ filed requesting that the statute of limitations is not
applied
Supreme Court
issued show cause order; respondents later challenged
admissibility on statute of limitations grounds
After the Conflict
Applied for Interim Relief as a victim of the conflict before
the District Administration Office: Rejected as the scope of
victims of rape or other forms of sexual violence was excluded
from the list of interim relief
Aftermath
No investigation followed.
No one was held accountable.
No reparation for Ms.I.
CLOSED WITHOUT ACTION IN DOMESTIC AVENUES.
Torture
Mr. B: A Survivor’s Story
Mr. B was taken by security forces after being seen talking to
someone accused of political involvement. Detained at army
barracks, they were held incommunicado (cut off from the outside
world).
Over many months, they were subjected to repeated torture:
beatings, threats, humiliation, and forced confessions. There was
no access to a lawyer, no medical care, and no contact with their
family.
Eventually, Mr. B was transferred to police custody, made to sign
a confession under pressure, and sent to prison under a preventive
detention order.
Their family sought justice:
Justice Pursuit at Domestic Avenues Timeline
District Police Office
no complaint was recorded; no help offered
Chief District Officer (CDO)
claimed the detention was lawful and refused to
intervene
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
registered the complaint
Civil society groups
issued Urgent Actions and statements
Appellate Court
A habeas corpus petition was filed, challenging detention and
torture
Appellate Court
The court requested a response. The authorities denied
wrongdoing and justified the detention
Appellate Court
Eventually, the court ruled that the detention was unlawful
and ordered their release
Aftermath
No investigation was opened.
No one was prosecuted.
The torture was never acknowledged.
CLOSED WITHOUT ACTION IN DOMESTIC AVENUES.
Going to the Human Rights Committee
When domestic options fail, some families take their case to the Human
Rights Committee (HRC), an international body that monitors civil and
political rights under the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR).
Nepal has ratified both the ICCPR and its Optional Protocol I, which
means individuals in Nepal can directly submit complaints (called
communications) to the HRC when their rights are violated.
But even reaching the HRC is not simple.
WHAT IS THE HRC?
Made up of 18 independent experts.
Reviews individual complaints of rights violations.
Can make recommendations to States but cannot enforce them.
Who Can Submit?
Victims of serious rights violations (e.g. torture, arbitrary
killing, enforced disappearance and conflict- related sexual
violence).
A close family member or representative (if the victim can’t
submit it themselves).
Anonymous submissions are not allowed, but pseudonyms may be used
if there is a security risk.
BASIC CONDITIONS:
To be admissible, communication must:
Be submitted by someone directly affected.
Show a substantive rights violation (like the right to life,
liberty, freedom from torture).
Prove the violation happened under Nepal's jurisdiction and after
1991 (when Nepal accepted the HRC's authority).
Not to be under review by another international body.
Be submitted within a reasonable time (usually within 5 years of
exhausting domestic remedies, unless delay is justified).
Show that all domestic legal options were tried first (unless they
were unavailable, ineffective, or unreasonably delayed).
Exception to the
admissibility requirement: Enforced Disappearances
Disappearances are not one-time events. The uncertainty, trauma, and
lack of accountability continue and so do the violations. That's why
the HRC accepts disappearance cases even when the original act
happened long ago.
The HRC Process
Complaint submitted
Individual communication filed
HRC reviews admissibility
May request additional information from the
applicants
Government response
Nepal invited to comment
Applicants' comments
Provided response to state's party observation
HRC issues Views
Issues its recommendations
Impact of HRC Decisions
These recommendations are not legally binding, but they carry
significant moral and political weight. They provide:
Official international recognition that a wrong occurred.
Pressure on the State to acknowledge, investigate, or
compensate.
A permanent record in international law that survivors can
reference and that activists can build upon.
Many families choose this path not because it guarantees justice,
but because it affirms truth, dignity, and visibility of their
violations.
THE RECOMMENDATION
In each of the 28 cases, the Human Rights Committee found Nepal
responsible for serious human rights violations and issued direct
instructions for what must happen next.
These were not optional. They were binding international obligations
that Nepal had voluntarily agreed to when it ratified the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional
Protocol.
Grouped by theme, here is what Nepal was told to do:
Truth and Investigation
Conduct a thorough and effective investigation into the facts.
If the victim was killed or disappeared, locate their remains and
return them to the family.
Provide families with regular, detailed updates on the progress of
investigations.
Justice and Accountability
Prosecute, try, and punish those responsible, with penalties that
match the gravity of the crimes.
Make the outcomes of legal action public.
Rehabilitation and Support
Provide psychological rehabilitation and medical treatment (free
of charge).
Offer support not only to victims but also to their families.
Reparation and Dignity
Provide adequate compensation.
Offer official apologies and public measures of satisfaction, such
as memorials in victims' names.
Restore the dignity and reputation of the victims and their
families.
Legal Reform and Prevention
Amend domestic laws on torture and enforced disappearance to meet
international standards.
Remove barriers like short statutes of limitations that block
justice.
Transparency and Acknowledgment
Translate and widely publish the Committee's decisions ("Views")
in Nepali and other official languages.
Disseminate the findings to raise public awareness and ensure
institutional learning.
Still Waiting for Justice
The Human Toll
The Human Rights Committee’s decisions relate to 92 victims,
including:
All were found to have suffered serious violations of their
fundamental rights.
Implementation Remains Low
Only 9 out of 29 HRC decisions have been translated into Nepali.
Only 3 victims have received compensation from the Government.
89 victims are still left awaiting compensation.
In none of the cases:
Have investigations been conducted or reopened
Have perpetrators been prosecuted or sanctioned
Has psychological or medical support been provided
In cases of enforced disappearance,
the fate and whereabouts of victims remain unknown.
Relief ≠ Justice
Some families received small amounts of interim relief, particularly
in disappearance and extrajudicial killing cases. But this is not
compensation, as required by the HRC and victims of torture and
sexual violence were excluded entirely.
Victims continue to live with:
Physical pain
Mental trauma
No closure
No accountability
Partial Law Reform Isn't Enough
2018 Legal Reforms
Nepal criminalized torture and enforced disappearance, but:
Definitions still conflict with international law.
Statutes of limitation block justice.
The law does not apply retroactively so it excludes all the cases
submitted to the HRC.
August 2024 Truth and Reconciliation
Recognizes conflict-related sexual violence and offers some hope for
the serious human rights violations victims of conflict, but:
Failure of recent transitional justice commissions to adopt
survivor-centered approaches, particularly on issues of sexual
violence.
Lack of policies ensuring confidentiality, safety, security,
mental health support, and dignified participation of survivors.
No Real Dialogue with the HRC
Nepal is obligated to report on its implementation within 180
days of an HRC decision. But as of July 2025:
7 Cases
Nepal submitted information to the HRC (out of 29)
Nepal Government has not engaged in any ongoing dialogue with HRC.
Grade "C"
HRC implementation rating (actions taken do not implement the
recommendations)
The Bottom Line:
Nepal made promises under international law.
The Human Rights Committee issued decisions.
Victims are still waiting.
Justice has not arrived.
Reflection
At this point in the journey, we invite you to pause and reflect.
What would justice look like if it were for you? What would you say to those still
waiting?
Your words will become part of a living archive of collective
witness and advocacy.