Property Investigation Commission: What Steps Will the New Government Take from Identifying to Seizing Illegal Assets?
Image source, EPA/Shutterstock
Interest is growing regarding the clear and extensive mandate of the newly formed Property Investigation Commission by the government.
The Cabinet, in its meeting on Wednesday, established a five-member commission headed by former Supreme Court Justice Rajendra Kumar Bhandari.
According to government spokesperson and Minister of Education, Science and Technology, Youth and Sports, Sasmita Pokharel, the commission is tasked with collecting, verifying, and investigating asset declarations of chief political office holders and high-level officials holding public positions from 2005/06 to 2025/26 in the Nepali calendar.
However, the government has not clearly specified which levels of public office are considered ‘chief political office holders and high-ranking officials’.
Previously, in 2001, the government formed a judicial investigation commission led by then-sitting Justice Bhairav Prasad Lamsal, which scrutinized the assets of individuals from various sectors post-1990.
At that time, a comprehensive study involving employees and their assets was conducted.
Minister Sasmita Pokharel has confirmed that the assets of the currently discussed Prime Minister and ministers also fall within the commission’s investigation scope, but detailed terms of reference have not been disclosed.
How Straightforward Is Data Collection and Verification?
Image source, Reuters
The commission is responsible for ‘collecting’ asset declarations.
Former Deputy Attorney General Thok Prasad Shivakoti, who worked as staff in the Lamsal Commission, suggests that after the current commission’s mandate is fully public, various aspects can be properly evaluated.
He recalls, “After such notifications were issued, people had to submit their details. Some asset declarations required further clarification, necessitating requests for additional information.”
“Once the relevant individuals submitted their details following the notifications, the process advanced,” Shivakoti added.
The Lamsal Commission delivered its report and documentation in just over one year.
At that time, individuals, officials, and leaders from diverse areas were examined regarding their assets within a decade. Now, the set period covers two decades.
If the position is considered ‘high-level,’ the number of posts under investigation could be fewer than before. However, if governmental manpower and representatives from local and provincial governments are included, the count may increase.
“Nowadays, a lot of information is stored in computer systems, making investigations easier than before,” said an official who wished to remain unnamed. “Details about property, shares, and bank deposits are easier to obtain now.”
Complex Investigation Process
Image source, Getty Images
According to sources, in cases where there is dissatisfaction over verification, the investigation phase begins, which involves taking statements and gathering additional information. This is the commission’s main and most complicated phase.
Lamsal Commission member Gyanendra Bahadur Shrestha had previously expressed reluctance to call this issue very old.
The commission’s investigative system is said to align with the Anti-Corruption Commission, which holds the authority to file cases, while the investigation commission is responsible for recommendations and pointing issues out.
Registrar of Special Court Ved Prasad Upreti recalled working as an officer responsible for the self-declaration form completion during his time with the Lamsal Commission.
“The submitted information was screened, and if suspicious, further study was conducted followed by summons. Afterward, it would be sent to the secret branch, and we would not be informed further,” Upreti said.
What Are the Procedures for Case Filing and Asset Seizure?
If suspicious matters arise, the commission points them out in its report and suggests advancing the case and charges through regular legal procedures.
Issues such as corruption, illicit wealth, and money laundering may surface, according to officials.
Previous experience shows that regular court processes take a long time, with many corruption-related cases persisting through the judicial phase for more than ten years.
Experts indicate that the constitution allows for flexible establishment of special courts, tribunals, or judicial bodies as per federal law under Article 152.
A former judge (who wished to remain anonymous) stated, “Cases can be handled in the current special court and then efficiently finalized in the Supreme Court for specific case types. The government can also choose another swifter pathway within the constitution if desired.”
The ruling party, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), has already declared the nationalization of illegal assets.
However, knowledgeable sources note that due to the number and structure of judges in courts, requested cases cannot be resolved swiftly, and the regular process delays the nationalization of assets declared illegal.
The government has not provided detailed information on this matter. Some experts speculate that given the current situation, final decisions will be made soon, making disclosure currently unnecessary.
We also provide news on YouTube. To subscribe to our channel and watch videos, click here. You can also view our content on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Additionally, our radio program airs Monday through Friday at 8:45 PM.
