Participants in the event viewed the formation of the task force to deliberate on the bill to amend the Disappeared Persons Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act (TJ bill) and the report submitted by the task force as a vital moment in the TJ process of Nepal.

Victims said that the sudden transpiring of events in the often sluggish TJ process raised the need to hold a consultation meeting with CSOs. A meeting among eminent legal experts, human rights defenders and civil society representatives was held to review the provisions in the bill and analyse it from the victims' lens.

A total of 29 people comprising victims and legal experts participated in the meeting. Six legal and human rights defenders provided their insights on the bill.

During the meeting, victim community representative Gopal Bahadur Shah condemned the bill by saying that it was a sugar-coated poison. Another conflict victim Surendra Khatri showed dissatisfaction over the bill's failure in securing the rights of disabled victims. Another victim Kalyan Bahadur Budhathoki raised doubts about the bill saying that it fails to address the issue of child soldiers recruited during the conflict.

Legal experts highlighted that the provision on punishment for perpetrators of serious human rights violations in the bill is unjustified and it goes against the international principles of human rights law and humanitarian law.

International Senior Legal Advisor for the International Commission of Jurists and Advocacy Forum-Nepal's (AF) Founder Dr Mandira Sharma said that war crimes and crimes against humanity must be included within the definition of serious violations of human rights. She added that the provisions of claiming 25 percent punishment for perpetrators of serious human rights violations paves the way for blanket amnesty and limits the avenues for remedy of victims.

Legal Expert and Coordinator of the loose forum of human rights defenders Accountability Watch Committee Raju Prasad Chapagai emphasised that impunity for perpetrators tarnishes Nepal's image in the eyes of the international community.

Senior Advocate Dinesh Tripathi elaborated on the limitation set out to register cases of serious sexual violence. He concluded that the statute of limitation could be a hurdle to filing complaints about cases of sexual violence for adjudication.

Legal experts including Indra Aryal and Kashi Ram Dhungana and Human Rights Defender Charan Prasain mentioned that the bill was not victim-centric. They said that the narrowing down of the definition of 'enforced disappearances' prevented the victims who were forcefully disappeared and later released to seek justice. It does not align with the spirit of the Geneva Convention and the principles of international human rights and humanitarian law, they said.

The CSO representatives emphasised that the bill contains some positive aspects but still requires significant revisions from a human rights and humanitarian law perspective.

During the closing session, victims' representatives said that the meeting helped them garner a detailed understanding of the bill. They expressed gratitude to the experts for their invaluable expertise.

The victims also committed to communicating the understanding from the meeting to the larger mass of victims at the national level meeting scheduled for 11 August.