Investigation Report Raises Serious Questions Over Nepali Army's Inaction During Gen-Z Protests

Serious questions have been raised regarding the role of the Nepali Army during the violent incidents that occurred on Bhadra 23 and 24 amidst the Gen-Z movement. The report from the investigation commission formed to probe the agitation has revealed that the army, deployed to protect key government bodies and historical heritage sites, was not mobilized in time and remained inactive in several locations.

The report mentions that despite the Chief District Officer of Kathmandu requesting army assistance to strengthen security using the Local Administration Act, 2028, timely support was not received. On Bhadra 23, after the situation around the Federal Parliament building became tense, the District Security Committee corresponded for army assistance at 12 PM, but the army appears to have entered the Parliament building only around 3 PM.

The army contingent deployed from the Narsingh Dal barracks for Parliament security argued that they could not advance because protesters were lying under the wheels of their trucks. However, according to the police and eyewitnesses, the army's hesitation, waiting for police escort even when soldiers could have dismounted and walked to the Parliament building, raised doubts about their intentions.

Even more surprisingly, the army detachment stationed inside the Parliament building on the night of Bhadra 23 left immediately after protesters started setting the building on fire on the following day, the 24th. This left the police alone in crowd control, leading to many deaths and hundreds injured when force was used.

The army's role also appeared mysterious during the arson and looting incidents at the nation's heritage site Singha Durbar and the President's residence, Shital Niwas, on Bhadra 24. CCTV footage and eyewitness testimonies confirm that army personnel stood idly by, watching, on the path leading to the new Home Ministry building when protesters entered Singha Durbar for the second time.

Similarly, when protesters forcibly entered the main gate of Shital Niwas, the country's supreme institution, and burned historical buildings and documents, the deployed army officers and soldiers offered no effective resistance. The commission concluded that the public's trust in the army has wavered because the army failed to fulfill its duty to protect these archaeological monuments, considered centers of public faith.

Extreme negligence by the army commander was also evident in the incident at the Prime Minister's residence in Baluwatar. Instead of stopping the angry crowd chanting slogans against the then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, the army allowed them to enter freely.

Even as protesters vandalized buildings near the main gate and advanced towards the Prime Minister's main residence, the army, responsible for security, remained silent. Army officials claimed they adopted the 'life over property' principle to avoid excessive casualties and did not use weapons. They also argued that if a curfew had been imposed at 8:30 AM on Bhadra 24 instead of 5 AM, such damage would not have occurred.

However, the army was not seen to have performed poorly in all areas. Amidst the extreme crisis on Bhadra 24, the army carried out the rescue of VIPs and saved police officers trapped on the roof of the Maharajgunj Police Circle via helicopter. The report states that if the army had not become actively mobilized across the country after 10 PM that day, the existence of the nation could have been at risk, and further loss of life and property would have been certain.

The report notes that the army was widely praised for the initiative it took to establish peace and security immediately after the then Prime Minister resigned. However, the report clearly indicates the failure of the concerned army commanders in preventing the vandalism and arson at sensitive locations like the Parliament, Singha Durbar, and Shital Niwas.