Image source, Reuters
Published
Reading time: 5 minutes
The chairman of a government-formed committee has revealed that a recommendation has been prepared to withdraw cases against some protesters involved in last year’s Gen Z movement.
The committee is set to submit its report along with its opinions to Home Minister Sudhan Gurung.
Baburam Regmi, the committee chair and former judge of the High Court, stated that the recommendation to withdraw cases applies to “certain individuals” as permitted by law.
“Our report will be based on our existing legal framework,” he said.
According to the committee, 1,887 individuals in 33 districts are facing 445 cases. Among them, some are absconding, some detained, while others have been released on bail or surety.
The Gen Z movement took place nationwide on September 8 and 9 last year, demanding an end to benefits and privileges granted based on corruption, good governance, and nepotism.
When several youths were fatally shot by police on the first day of protest, the demonstrations on the following day intensified, leading to arson, vandalism, looting, and attacks on security forces. Officials reported investigations and cases being filed against those involved.
“There are roughly three categories of cases: damage to individual property, damage to some business establishments, and damage to government institutions,” Regmi explained.
“Our law, Supreme Court precedents, and previous practices allow withdrawal of some cases. Taking all this into account, we will submit the report.”
Earlier, the police reported that charges relating to 13 types of offenses had been filed in connection with the events of September 9.
These included charges of culpable homicide, illegal possession of weapons, misconduct, attempt to murder, robbery and theft, prison law violations, arson, and vandalism.
Regmi noted that over 50 cases have already been decided by the courts and the report suggests the possibility of presidential pardon on the government’s recommendation for some protesters.
‘The New Generation Has Also Learned the Old Ways’
Image source, BBC/AshokDahal
Former Supreme Court Justice Balram KC stated that both the government and new generation leaders have adopted the same old practices.
“There has been much misuse. This is not the first government to misuse the system, but the new generation has learned the old methods. This happens due to bad company,” KC remarked.
According to former Justice KC, it is appropriate for the government not to file appeals if the accused have already been acquitted by the courts rather than withdrawing cases arbitrarily.
“The government should not discriminate or seek to discredit previous administrations by pardoning or withdrawing cases without just cause. If courts have acquitted them, no appeal should be filed,” he added.
However, KC pointed out that globally, it is common to recommend pardons to the president and grant amnesty in such cases.
“Since criminal justice systems are not flawless, governments recommend pardons and presidents grant them to correct shortcomings,” KC explained.
“Countries like the UK and the US also grant pardons. However, in our context, pardoning those close to oneself has worsened the situation.”
‘Not All Cases Will Be Withdrawn’
Image source, PMO
Despite the committee’s recommendation, the Muluki Criminal Procedure Code and withdrawal procedure laws prohibit withdrawal of certain cases.
The law bans withdrawal of cases related to fake passports or citizenship, immigration, corruption, human trafficking and smuggling, drug trafficking or business, illegal hunting and trade of wildlife, poisoning of public consumer goods, inhumane treatment resulting in death, money laundering, and protection of ancient monuments.
“There is a law that cases involving possession of weapons cannot be withdrawn. We have thoroughly examined these aspects,” Regmi clarified.
According to Regmi, the committee was instructed to study and recommend case withdrawals based on the agreement with the interim government led by Sushila Karki.
Experts suggest that even if the committee recommends withdrawal, cases may not be dropped solely on that basis.
Former Justice KC emphasized that the committee’s recommendation is not binding on the government or courts.
“Courts have the authority to refuse withdrawal; that is within their prerogative,” he said.
Chairman Regmi noted that after the report is reviewed by the relevant ministry and the Attorney General’s Office, only then will the legal process for withdrawal begin.
“The court where the case is filed will hear the petition, and it will be up to the court to accept or reject it; the legal procedure must be followed. The court will not simply accept withdrawal based solely on our recommendation,” he added.
An earlier agreement between Gen Z leaders and then-Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s interim government outlined recommendations for bail and withdrawal of charges if the accused were not involved in serious crimes.
Activist Sarisma Thapa stated that there was consensus not to criminalize activities expressing political dissent or dissatisfaction with government institutions.
“Our agreement stated that if actions were connected to irrigation systems with criminal intent, then legal action should be taken,” she remarked.
The three-member committee included former Deputy Attorney General Chet Nath Ghimire and former Deputy Inspector General of Police Posraj Pokharel.
The committee has reviewed statements from those facing cases, along with events and evidence.
For related videos and to subscribe to our YouTube channel click here. Additionally, content is available on Facebook, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. Furthermore, the Nepali service broadcasts daily from Monday to Friday at 8:45 PM.
