02540    a2200181   4500999001700000020001800017082001800035100001800053245006700071260002800138300001300166440008100179504001800260520181200278650011802090942001202208952013802220  c25760d25760  a9780367025410  a954.96bSEL-T  aSelim, Yvette  aTransitional justice in Nepalb: interests, victims and agency  bRoutledgec2018aLondon  aix, 235p  aRoutledge/ Asian Studies Association of Australia (ASAA) South Asian Series   aInclude Index  aThe conflict in Nepal (1996 – 2006) resulted in an estimated 15,000 deaths, 1,300 disappearances, along with other serious human rights and humanitarian law violations. Demands for peace, democracy, accountability and development, have abounded in the post-conflict context. Although the conflict catalysed major changes in the social and political landscape in Nepal, the transitional justice (TJ) process has remained deeply contentious and fragmented. This book provides an in-depth analysis of the transitional justice process in Nepal. Drawing on interviews with a diverse range of stakeholders, including victims, ex-combatants, community members, human rights advocates, journalists and representatives from diplomatic missions, international organisations and the donor community, it reveals the differing viewpoints, knowledge, attitudes and preferences about TJ and other post-conflict issues in Nepal. The author develops an actor typology and an action spectrum, which can be used in Nepal and other post-conflict contexts. The actor typology identifies four main groups of TJ actors—experts, brokers, implementers and victims—and highlights who is making claims and on behalf of whom. The action spectrum, based on contentious politics literature and resistance literature, demonstrates the strategies actors use to shape the TJ process. This book argues that the potential of TJ lies in these dynamics of contention. It is by letting these dynamics play out that different conceptualisations of TJ can arise. While doing so may lead to practical challenges and produce situations that are normatively undesirable for some actors, particularly when certain political parties and national actors seem to ‘hijack’ TJ, remaining steadfast to the dominant TJ paradigm is also undesirable.  aPolitics and governmentvCriminal justicevTransitional justicevReparation (Criminal justice)zSouth AsiazNepal  2ddccBK  00104070aNASSDOCbNASSDOCd2019-12-26eOPg620.50i2019-12-20l0o954.96 SEL-Tp50565r2019-12-26 00:00:00v850.00w2019-12-26yBK