{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01675977653631285, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0037243947858473, 'mean_word_length': 5.891025641025641, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Truth commissions and democratic transitions: Neither truth and reconciliation nor democratization in Nepal

Abstract Truth commissions have become increasingly viewed as necessary for the establishment and consolidation of democracy in states undergoing transitions from authoritarian rule. Yet, their ability to function effectively and contribute to democratization rests, in part, on the preexistence of core democratic values in the states and societies they serve. This article examines how this paradoxical relationship between truth commissions and democratic transitions has played out in the case of Nepal. It argues that, although a truth and reconciliation commission was included in Nepal’s 2006 peace agreement to facilitate the country’s redemocratization process, the implicit political compromise on which it was established—together with a problematic legislative process, lack of commitment to human rights, and weak respect for the rule of law—has made it nearly impossible for the TRC to make any meaningful contribution to truth, justice, or democracy.