Ex-Prime Minister Oli and Home Minister Lekhak Arrested in Connection with Suppression of 2006 Movement; Inquiry or Political Vendetta?

Former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak have been arrested for investigation regarding the suppression of the 2006 people’s movement (2062/63 BS). Oli is currently receiving treatment at Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, while Lekhak remains in police custody at Police Battalion No. 2. Lawyers affiliated with UML and Congress are preparing to file a habeas corpus petition with the Supreme Court in protest of the arrests.

March 28, Kathmandu – The former prime minister and home minister have been taken into custody amid investigations into incidents that occurred while exercising executive authority. Their arrests relate to alleged responsibility for the death of citizens during the crackdown on the 2006 people’s movement.

Following their arrests, Oli was admitted to Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital due to health issues, whereas Lekhak was placed under detention at the Maharajgunj Police Battalion No. 2. UML supporters have taken to the streets in protest, and plans to challenge the matter legally are underway. The police are expected to present both leaders before the District Court in Kathmandu tomorrow.

In opposition to the arrests, legal professionals supporting UML and Congress are coordinating a joint petition for habeas corpus to be submitted to the Supreme Court. Discussions regarding this course of action are ongoing.

The implementation of the investigative commission’s report has revealed divisions among legal experts and politicians. Some consider the process natural and justified, while others allege it to be politically motivated retaliation.

Supporting the view that enforcing the report is a natural step, the commission’s chairman and former Justice Krishna Jung Rayamajhi stated that investigation proceedings are a permissible consequence following the government’s decision to implement the recommendations. He explained, “After the government decided to apply the report, the arrests were made to continue the investigation. The police have taken them for inquiry, and the court will extend the investigation period as needed, followed by interrogations.”

Mohna Ansari, a former member of the National Human Rights Commission and an advocate, also noted that filing a complaint and the report itself form a basis for criminal investigation. She emphasized the gravity of conducting proceedings supported by CCTV footage, eyewitness testimonies, and other evidence.

The government maintained confidentiality over the arrests of Oli and Lekhak. After additional decisions were made in accordance with the cabinet’s resolution, the two were apprehended on Saturday morning.

JNM Nepal has demanded the arrest and prosecution of the then home administration and security personnel involved in the incident of Bhadra 23, 2063 BS. “We remain alert against any conspiracies aimed at protecting the perpetrators of the crackdown,” JNM stated.

Questions surrounding the procedures and legal formalities of the process have led to accusations of haste by the government. Oli’s supporters and certain legal experts argue that there were procedural irregularities in the arrest process.

Former Attorney General Ramesh Badal criticized the government’s decision to initiate immediate trial while constituting committees for others, calling this approach biased and doubting the impartiality of the investigation.

According to the government’s decision, besides security personnel, investigation was also supposed to include then Home Secretary Gokarna Mani Duwadi and Kathmandu Chief District Officer Shavi Rizal. Home Minister Sudan Gurung had authorized immediate investigation against Oli and Lekhak based on the former cabinet’s policy decision.

Correspondences regarding the matter had been sent from the Police Headquarters and Metropolitan Police Office to the police precincts of Kathmandu and Bhaktapur. The police carried out sudden arrests, issuing necessary arrest warrants under Schedule 9 of the Muluki Criminal Procedure Code. However, Section 9(6) of the Code permits such warrants only if there is a risk of flight or evidence tampering, raising concerns over the legality of the procedure.

Ram Prasad Shrestha, senior advocate and member of the Judicial Council, remarked that while investigations can proceed based on evidence, the government appears to have acted hastily. “The new government seems to have rushed the process. If further investigation was necessary, it could have progressed without detaining individuals linked to the prime minister and home minister,” he said.

Although there are various arguments both supporting and opposing the arrests, the police have not yet been granted sufficient time to gather additional evidence.

What happens next? On Sunday, the two leaders must be presented before the District Court for extension of their custody. Meanwhile, habeas corpus petitions against their arrests are expected to be filed at the Supreme Court. Both courts will conduct preliminary inquiries on Sunday and Monday, respectively, to determine the remaining period of detention.