Afghanistan’s parliament recently passed a nonbinding resolution urging the government to grant immunity to all Afghans who were part of the wars of the last 25 years. The 12-point resolution, called the Peace and Reconciliation Charter, was first passed by the lower house, called the Wolesi Jirga (People’s Council), on 31 January 2007, and by the upper house soon after on 20 February 2007. Afghanistan remains one of the most war ravaged nations in the world, and the fact that even the parliament has many former militants and mujahedeen commanders, former members of the Taliban government, and the earlier Communist leadership as its leaders, reflects how relevant and pervious this issue is. The bill, although still not a law, became the topic of much debate drawing countrywide protests both from the masses and the human rights activists.
The resolution
The lawmakers who were in support of the bill are of the view that the resolution was passed in the interest of peace and stability and was intended to include even the fugitive Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, and the renegade mujahedeen leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. However, the resolution did not receive a unanimous approval in the parliament. First proposed by a group of former mujahedeen leaders and Nur ul-Hag Ulumi, a former Communist general who served during the Soviet occupation, a number of liberal and democratic legislators left the chamber in protest before the vote. The bill proposes that those who took up arms in the past should be free from prosecution and that those who had fought the current government should be allowed to join the reconciliation process if they accept the Constitution and the laws of the land. The resolution only applies to those who accept Afghanistan’s constitution and government authority, so an amnesty would apply to a minority of former Taliban who have reconciled with the government, but not for current insurgent leaders such as Mullah Omar.
The challenges
The resolution mainly concerns the mujahedeen leaders who led the resistance to the Soviet occupation of the 1980s and later turned their fighters on one another, plunging the country into civil war. Since many of its proponents are warlords themselves, the impartiality and the workability of the resolution has been questioned by many, including the United Nations. On the one hand, the warlords conducted a nationwide rally to show their support for the resolution. On the other end of the spectrum was the concern expressed by several human rights organizations and international institutions. The U.N. human rights chief, Louise Arbour, criticized the resolution, challenging that it could lead to warlords who committed serious war crimes going unpunished. She said,
Experience has shown time and again that effective and durable national reconciliation must be based on respect for international human rights standards and the rule of law, and must not come at their expense.
U.N.’s special representative to Afghanistan, Tom Koenigs has asserted that
one thing must be very clear, and it should be clear worldwide: amnesty for gross violations of human rights and for war crimes shouldn’t exist.
New York based group Human Rights Watch has called for officials, including Vice President Karim Khalili and Army Chief of Staff Abdul Rashid Dostum, to face trial before a special court for alleged war crimes. In a report, it listed Energy Minister Ismail Khan, Karzai’s senior security adviser Mohammed Qasim Fahim and parliamentarians Abdul Rasul Sayyaf and former President Burhanuddin Rabbani as among the ‘worst perpetrators.’ Nader Naderi, spokesman for the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), told Tolo Television that his organization backs `any kind of step taken toward reconciliation and strengthening peace and security.` However, Naderi added, the AIHRC believes that granting amnesty or exemptions to alleged war criminals `is beyond the authority` of governmental bodies and `relates to the people of Afghanistan.` The Afghan people `can make the final decisions, not institutions,` Naderi added.
The resolution therefore wavers between two extreme viewpoints held by the warlords sitting in the Parliament on the one hand and the people who suffered along with human rights organizations fighting for their opinion on the other hand. The Afghan common man did react extremely emotionally to the resolution, which seems natural given the volatile past of the country. A Kabul resident identified as Sakhi told Tolo Television that he `will never forgive those involved` in the civil war in his country, adding that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death for the death of few hundred people, while Afghan war criminals have killed thousands. There are many like Sakhi who have suffered deeply and still do due to the 25 long years of war experienced by the nation. It is now President Karzai who faces the dilemma. He has to decide whether to provide the nation with a new start by wiping out the violent past, or to make sure justice is delivered to each single war fighter who is responsible for the devastation rampant in the country.
Via: Radio Free Europe
