Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven:

(0) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
and(tt, X) → activate(X)
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
activate(X) → X

Q is empty.

(1) QTRSRRRProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Used ordering:
Recursive path order with status [RPO].
Quasi-Precedence:

nil > _₂
and₂ > [tt, activate₁] > _₂
isNePal₁ > [tt, activate₁] > _₂

Status:

_₂: [1,2]
tt: multiset
activate₁: multiset
isNePal₁: multiset
and₂: multiset
nil: multiset

With this ordering the following rules can be removed by the rule removal processor [LPAR04] because they are oriented strictly:

__(__(X, Y), Z) → __(X, __(Y, Z))
__(X, nil) → X
__(nil, X) → X
and(tt, X) → activate(X)
isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
activate(X) → X

(2) Obligation:

Q restricted rewrite system:
R is empty.
Q is empty.

(3) RisEmptyProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The TRS R is empty. Hence, termination is trivially proven.

(4) TRUE