April 14, 2025
Kathmandu – The violent criminal protests held on March 28 in Tinkune not only sparked debate, not only the inadequate dispatch of the Republican Party and the persistence of royalist sentiment in the country, but also the persistence of the state's response, as well as its ability to uphold public trust and democratic principles.
Demonstrations about the escalation of the demonstration into riots have not been answered, protesters clashed with police forces, two people died and more than 120 injured. Private and public properties, as well as media and supermarkets, were destroyed.
The scale of the forces used by security agencies to curb riots was revealed only a week later. The government said security officials took action to maintain law and order, but raised questions about the use of “disproportionate” force.
This situation seems to have quickly lost control, leading to chaos, as the people in trouble in the incident also include passers-by and ordinary people.
During this period, there have been increasing calls for judicial investigations to assess the riots and the appropriate use of force by police. Critics say independent inquiry is crucial to maintaining public trust.
“Judicial investigations and independent fact-findings are not only about addressing the violence of March 28 to satisfy the satisfaction of all, they will strengthen constitutional democracy and help curb the threats it faces,” Bipin Adhikari, a law professor and expert in the Constitution, wrote on his x account.
Under the Criminal Law, any crime can be investigated in accordance with the principles of criminal justice. Adhikari said the March 28 protests were carried out with the permission of the government, believing that the purpose of the royal protests was neither to damage public or private property nor to kill people. Likewise, the government allowed protests to uphold the right to freedom of expression, he said.
“Since the incident is controversial, it is unfair to the non-governmental side if seen only from the government's perspective,” Adhikari told the Post. “The state should not make judicial investigations a matter of prestige.”
In Adhikari's observation, the government only sees protesters as protesters who forcibly overturn the Constitution. Adhikari believes that “the government has come into contact with this incident from a single theoretical perspective.” “In fact, multiple legal and political principles may be relevant in this case.”
Adhikari added: “The use of force is subject to national and international norms. The standards set today can also be used in the future. Governments today's political parties may be on the streets; what if a similar protest method is adopted?”
However, so far, the Government has opposed the demands of the Judiciary Commission, insisting that the existing national mechanisms are sufficient to accomplish the work.
This position has attracted the attention of civil society groups and human rights watchers, who highlight the importance of transparency and impartiality in addressing this serious incident.
In view of excessive use of force during the protests, various human rights groups have called for independent judicial investigations.
A joint statement was released on April 6, the Accountability Committee, Amnesty International, Nepal, Advocacy Forum Nepal and the Nepal Institute for Justice and Rights required an independent judicial investigation into the incident.
Meanwhile, lawmakers discussed the issue of the Commission on Inquiry that investigated the incident during the meeting of the Parliamentary Law, Law and Human Rights Commission on Friday.
However, the Commission cannot issue any directives to the Government.
Bimala Subedi, chairman of the committee, said that there were incidents of vandalism, arson and even killings during pro-constitutional protests, and the meeting felt the need for a thorough investigation to reveal the facts.
The issue was discussed in the presence of Home Minister Ramesh Lekhek, who said the government would investigate the matter through regular legal procedures and bring the culprit to justice. But he refused the request from the Judicial Inquiry Commission.
“Lawmakers Sunil Sharma and Suhang Nembang are from the ruling party [Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, respectively] One committee member said: “Support the judicial investigation. But the interior minister ruled out this possibility.”
Earlier, on April 4, the House of Representatives' Committee on State Affairs and Good Governance also directed the government to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the March 28 pro-Bangladesh protests, urging legal proceedings against those involved in the violence directly and indirectly.
Minister of Information and Communications Technology Prithvi Subba Gurung, also a government spokesperson, said the Ministry of Home Affairs is investigating the issue and there will be no separate committee to investigate the incident, let alone conduct a judicial investigation.
Minister Gulong told the Post: “The incident falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Interior, which is studying it.”
On April 5, KP Sharma Oli, after arriving at Tribhuvan International Airport after attending the Bimstec summit in Thailand, hinted that the investigation committee of the March 28 incident might have been established.
“There may or may not be a judicial investigation, but any investigation will be fair,” Prime Minister Oli told reporters at the airport. “Not everything requires a judicial investigation. We will consider whether to conduct a judicial or other investigations.”
Among the opposition parties requesting a judicial investigation into the incident, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and the right-wing Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP). RPP also supported the joint People's Movement Committee for organizing the pro-clock protests on March 28.
Two senior RPP leaders, Rabindra Mishra and Dhawal Shamsher Rana, were arrested for inciting crowds to resort to expeditions and arson. Police also returned the protest's “site commander” Durga Prasai to custody on Friday. Police have been investigating them on charges of incitement and organized crime.
RPP leaders insist that the arrests of its leaders should also be investigated, the use of tear gas during the protest phase, possible infiltration and the deaths of protesters and video journalists.
“Inquiry conducted by the Judicial Committee can be impartial and independent because people from legal backgrounds, such as former Supreme Court judges, will lead the investigation,” said Dhruba Bahadur Pradhan, vice chairman of the RPP.
Asked why he and his party doubted the state mechanism, former Inspector General (IG) of the Nepal Police Department explained that they did not attempt to express doubts about the investigation conducted by the government mechanism, but the March 28 incident left many questions.
“In this case, there is increasing suspicion that police may have used improper power. A fair and independent team is needed to dispel doubts that investigations may be biased or may lead to conclusions that favor the authorities,” Pradhan said.
“As the state is accused of using too much force in the incident, even those who did not participate in the demonstrations were shot, it is natural to suspect the investigation conducted by the state mechanism,” he said.
