What lessons can be learned from the process of democratising Nepal’s security sector and what are the challenges ahead? This edited volume examines the Nepali security sector in relation to: the legislature-parliament; the executive; security providers; security-related actors; and civil society and the media. It argues that security sector reform should be based on a holistic approach that incorporates all relevant security structures, institutions and actors. Security sector transformation (SST) is an important element of democratisation, peace-building, institutional reform and political legitimacy.
Shiva Hari Daha’s chapter,’Democratising the Security Sector in Nepal’, provides an overview of security sector transformation in Nepal. The concept of SST goes beyond the traditional notion of security, which centres on relationship between the structures of the state and society. SST focuses on the social contract between the state and citizens. It brings the individual to the centre of security paradigms and reflects human security as one of the fundamental goals of the transformation process.
The democratic transformation of the security sector is particularly difficult in countries such as Nepal which are emerging from a violent past and undergoing a transition towards democratic politics. The lessons learned from efforts to transform the security sector in Nepal include:
- Security institutions are political structures and must be transformed as an integral part of democratisation, peace-building and state restructuring processes. They need to be redesigned in the light of the new would-be federal structure of Nepal and to improve inclusion of different identity groups.
- SST must deal with the legacies of violence including justice for victims of armed conflict, as well as the justice needs of individuals. The process of reconciliation involves holding security forces to account for breaches of human rights.Â
- The security sector is narrowly defined in political discourse. Little attention is paid to the intelligence service and there is a reluctance to discuss the role of Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists’) People’s Liberation Army, private security companies and other armed groups.
- Various peace agreements recognise the need for and importance of reforming the security sector; however, they fail to recognise the wide range of security providers or to establish a clear strategy for the reform of security structures. Nepal also lacks a coherent national security strategy, which undermines the transformation process.
Security sector transformation requires a holistic approach that takes account of all relevant security sector structures, institutions and actors. There is also a need to better understand the importance of interactions between structures and the human action or “agencyâ€ï¿½ within those structures. A holistic approach to SST in Nepal highlights the need to:
- Recognise a broader concept of security and take account of the different types of security providers (including the army, the police, the armed police force, border security, intelligence, non-statutory forces and private security companies).
- Promote SST through an incremental, step-by-step approach. The process must be under civilian control and locally owned.
- Encourage a broad-based approach to SST encompassing the military, technical, security, humanitarian and socio-economic aspects of reform.
- Draw up a separate agreement on SST to supplement the provisions of existing peace agreements. This agreement should define the concept of security and security structures, the kind of national security strategy or policy required, and the strategy for restructuring security institutions.
- The transformation of the security sector can also enhance the legitimacy of the state and political parties in Nepal. The CPN (Maoists) will also need to negotiate the future of the PLA as part of efforts to transform itself into democratic political party and to gain legitimacy among national and international actors.
