Home / News / Urgent Appeals / NEPAL: Police unable to arrest the murderers of Ram Hari Shrestha
 

NEPAL: Police unable to arrest the murderers of Ram Hari Shrestha

August 20, 2010

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

 

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-118-2010

 

 

 

20 August 2010

------------------------------------------------------

NEPAL: Police unable to arrest the murderers of Ram Hari Shrestha

 

ISSUES: Abduction; killing; impunity

------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

 

The Asian Human Rights Commission wishes to draw your attention on the case of Ram Hari Shrestha, a businessman from Kathmandou who was allegedly abducted on 27 April 2008 by members of the United Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN), which is mainly known as the Maoists Party, and later died reportedly in the aftermath of severe ill-treatment received inside the People's Liberation Army (PLA), third division in Chitwan. The Chitwan District Court has formally charged five Maoists cadres in relation to the case but, to date, only one has been arrested. Kali Bahadur Kham, the main accused in this case and former commandant of the PLA third division, has been promoted within the Maoists party and the party has refused to cooperate with the police and bring him before the civilian institutions.

 

 

CASE NARRATIVE:

 

 

According to the information we have received from Advocacy Forum, Ram Hari Shrestha, a businessman from Koteshor, Kathmandu was reportedly abducted on 27 April 2008 by members of the United Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN), which is known as Maoists party. He was accused of having stolen Rs 1.7 million and a weapon. The victim was then brought to the People's Liberation Army (PLA) cantonment in Chitwan District where he was severely beaten. On 8 May 2008, he succumbed to his injuries inflicted by torture by the members of the PLA and on 25 May 2008, his dead body was recovered from Kailash Village Development Committee (VDC) Ward No-1, Jugedi, Chitwan District on the bank of Trishuli River.

 

After a complaint was filed by Ramila Shrestha (Ram Hari Shrestha's wife), the Chitwan District Court formally charged five Maoists cadres in connection with the incident: Kali Bahadur Kham, Govinda Bahadur Batala, Keshab Adhikari, Ganga Ram Thapa and Karki and issued arrest warrants against them on 11 June 2008. Only one of the five, Batala, has been arrested and is now in pre-trial detention. The four other accused have been declared absconding by the police after they did not appear before the court.

 

In December 2008, the OHCHR office in Nepal expressed its concern regarding the inadequate investigation in Shrestha's killing and that 'six months after five persons were charged in relation to the crime only one individual has been arrested'. It underlined that it was believed that some of the other charged were 'inside the cantonment of the Maoists Army in Shaktikhor, Chitwan'.

 

Indeed, despite having launched an internal probe panel to investigate into Shrestha's killing and admitted their responsibility in it, the Maoists party has refused to cooperate with the police and has protected its cadres from civilian prosecutions. On 24 May 2008, the PLA announced that one of the main accused Kali Bahadur Kham who was the commander of the PLA Third Division at the time of Shrestha's abduction was suspended. Nevertheless, despite of those internal sanctions, he was never handed over to the police and was later promoted in the party hierarchy in January 2009. He is now a Central Committee Member and the Commander of the PLA Fifth Division. Moreover, the Maoists leadership has met up with the victim's family, agreed to pay compensation to the family and absolve Kham of the crime.

 

The Nepal Police has reported having sent two letters to the PLA requesting an interview with Kali Bahadur Kham on 23 May and 1 June 2008 which remained unanswered. They have reportedly not undertaken any other action to investigate into the allegations and justified by expressing their incapacity to arrest Kham without the cooperation of the Maoists party and of the People's Liberation Army. The National Human Rights Commission in its 2006-2009 Summary Report deplores the fact that the chief police of Chitwan District did not provide them with the information and documents demanded in relation with the case.

 

Kham has also been recently accused of masterminding the robbery of three Chinese traders in Kathmandu. On 9 August 2010, the Kathmandu District Court issued an arrest warrant against Kham and ordered the police to produce him before the court within seven days. The Home Minister Bhim Rawal met up with the Maoists Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal on 15 July to urge the Maoists party to hand over the accused to the police.

 

Since then, the Maoists have announced that they would discuss whether or not to cooperate with the police and to produce Kham in court in a Central Committee meeting which was supposed to be held on 12 August. Nevertheless, since that date, the Maoists party has not made any move to hand Kham over to the police.

 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

 

 

Interference of political parties with the course of justice has reportedly been deplored as an obstacle which prevents the accountability of past and present human rights violations in Nepal, therefore allowing further violations to take place and hampering the development of strong and independent rule of law institutions.

 

In her 2010 report

on the activities of her office in Nepal, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed her concern that 'Both the Nepalese Army and the UCPN-M continue to resist attempts to hold their personnel accountable for human rights violations and abuses and to withhold cooperation from civilian authorities responsible for investigating such cases'. The report specifically deplores that 'The leadership of the UCPN-M has (…) failed to cooperate with criminal investigations into the involvement of its cadres in serious human rights abuses during and after the conflict, including (…) the killing of Ram Hari Shrestha (…)'

 

Another high profile case illustrating the Maoists continuous unwillingness to cooperate with civilian justice institutions concerns the enforced disappearance and murder of Arjun Bahadur Lama

, a high school teacher in April 2005. In this case, the Maoists continuously refused to cooperate with the police investigation, they also refused to disclose to the victim's widow what they knew about her husband's whereabouts and they repeatedly threatened the human rights defenders involved in the case.

 

In this case, as in Ram Hari Shrestha's, the civilian justice institutions have proven unable to overcome the obstacles by the Maoists party and to prosecute the persons charged with the crime. Since the end of the conflict, despite orders from the courts, the police have repeatedly proven unable to arrest and detain members of the Maoists or of the Nepal Army accused of human rights violations. This repeated surrender in front of the Maoists or the Army has damaged the credibility of the rule of law institutions in the country and further eroded their ability to effectively protect and give justice to all the citizens equally.

 

SUGGESTED ACTION:

 

 

Please join us in writing to the competent authorities urging for a proper investigation into this case and asking for holding the perpetrators of the abduction and the subsequent killing accountability.

 

Please be informed that the Asian Human Rights Commission has written separate letters to the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Nepal (OHCHR).

 

To support this appeal, please click here:

 

 

SAMPLE LETTER:

 

 

Dear __________,

 

NEPAL: The murderers of Ram Hari Shrestha must be prosecuted

 

 

Name of victim:

Ram Hari Shrestha, businessman and resident of Kathmandu, Nepal

 

Names of alleged perpetrators:

Cadres of the Maoists party including Kali Bahadur Kham, Govinda Bahadur Batala, Keshab Adhikari, Ganga Ram Thapa and Karki

 

Date of incident:

27 April 2008

Place of incident:

Peoples' Liberation Army (PLA) camp, Third Division in Chitwan district, Nepal

 

I am writing to raise my serious concern regarding the case of the abduction and murder of Ram Hari Shrestha and ask for the subsequent arrest and prosecution of four Maoists cadres charged with this case.

 

According to the information, I have received from the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), Ram Hari Shrestha, a businessman from Koteshor, Kathmandu was abducted on 27 April 2008 by members of the Maoists party accusing him of having stolen Rs 1.7 million and a weapon. The victim was then brought to the PLA cantonment in Chitwan District where he was severely beaten. I know that on 8 May 2008, he died from his torture-related injuries and on 25 May 2008, his dead body was recovered from Kailash VDC Ward No- 1, Jugedi, Chitwan District on the bank of Trishuli River.

 

I am informed that after a complaint was filed by Ramila Shrestha (Ram Hari Shrestha's wife), the Chitwan District Court has formally charged five Maoists cadres in connection with the incident: Kali Bahadur Kham, Govinda Bahadur Batala, Keshab Adhikari, Ganga Ram Thapa and Karki and issued arrest warrants against them on 11 June 2008. I am surprised to hear that only one of the five, Batala, has been arrested and is now in pre-trial detention. The four other accused have been declared absconding by the police after they did not appear before the court.

 

I further know that in December 2008, the OHCHR office in Nepal expressed its concern regarding the inadequate investigation in Shrestha's killing and that 'six months after five persons were charged in relation to the crime only one individual has been arrested'.

 

I want to express my serious concern regarding the protection the Maoists party has granted to its cadres to protect them from facing civilian prosecutions. I am informed that the OHCHR office in Nepal had further voiced its concern that some of the other accused in the case had found shelter' inside the cantonment of the Maoists Army in Shaktikhor, Chitwan'. I am further appalled to hear that one of the main accused in this case, Kali Bahadur Kham who was the commander of the PLA Third Division at the time of Shrestha's abduction was never handed over to the police and was later promoted in the party hierarchy in January 2009.

 

I know that Kham has also been recently accused of masterminding the robbery of three Chinese traders in Kathmandu and that an arrest warrant against him was issued on 9 August 2010 by the Kathmandu District Court. The Home Minister Bhim Rawal met up with the Maoists Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal on 15 July to urge the Maoists party to hand over the accused to the police.

 

The Nepal Police has reported having sent two letters to the PLA requesting an interview with Kali Bahadur Kham on 23 May and 1 June 2008 which remained unanswered. I am concerned to hear that the police have reportedly not undertaken any other action to investigate into the allegations and have expressed its inability to arrest Kham without the Maoists' cooperation. I know that they further failed to provide the National Human Rights Commission with documents and information related to the case.

 

Since then, the Maoists have announced that they would discuss whether or not to cooperate with the police and to produce Kham in court in a Central Committee meeting which was supposed to held on 12 August. Nevertheless, since that date, the Maoists party has not made any move to hand Kham over to the police.

 

Two years after the death of Ram Hari Shrestha, I consider that it is now time for the civilian justice institutions in Nepal to reassert that the authority of their decisions must be respected by everyone, irrespectively of their political affiliations and that this authority goes beyond the walls of the Maoists cantonments. Should the civilian institutions surrender once more in front of the opposition of a powerful organisation, the already eroded rule of law system in the country will be further weakened, destabilizing its ability to effectively protect and give justice to all the citizens.

 

I, therefore, urge you to take the appropriate measures to ensure that all the accused in the case of Ram Hari Shrestha are promptly arrested and prosecuted. The police should take all the appropriate steps to carry on the thorough investigation of this case, arrest those against which an arrest warrant is pending in relation to this case and communicate the information they have with the human rights organisations. I urge the UCPN-M leadership to refrain from interfering within the due course of justice and to cooperate with the police investigation in order to locate the suspects.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

----------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

 

 

1. Mr. Ramesh Chand Thakuri

Inspector General of Police

Police Head Quarters, Naxal

Kathmandu

NEPAL

Fax: +977 1 4415593

Tel: +977 1 4412432 (Secretary to IGP)

E-mail: info@nepalpolice.gov.np, phqigs@nepalpolice.gov.np

 

2. Dr. Bharat Bahadur Karki

Attorney General

Office of Attorney General

Ramshahpath, Kathmandu

NEPAL

Fax: +977 1 4262582

Tel: +977 1 4262506

Email: attorney@mos.com.np

 

3. Mr. Kedar Nath Upadhaya

Chairperson

National Human Rights Commission

Pulchowk, Lalitpur

NEPAL

Fax: +977 1 55 47973

Tel: +977 1 5010015

E-mail: complaints@nhrcnepal.org or nhrc@nhrcnepal.org

 

4. Mr. Yadhav Raj Khanal

Chief

Police Human Rights Cell

Nepal Police, Naxal, Kathmandu

NEPAL

Fax: +977 1 4415593

Tel: +977 1 4411618/4411705/4420542

E-mail: hrcell@nepalpolice.gov.np

 

5. Mr. Bhim Rawal

Home Minister,

Ministry of Home Affairs,

Singha Darbar,

Kathmandu,

NEPAL

Fax: +977 1 42 11 232

Tel: +977 1 4211211 / 4211264

 

6. Mr. Puspa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda)

Chairperson

Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists)

Central Office

Perishdanda-Koteshwor, Kathmandu

NEPAL

Tel: +977 1 4602290

Fax: +977 1 4602289

Email: ucpnminfo@gmail.com

E-mail: maobadi_soochanaburo@yahoo.com

 

 

Thank you.

 

Urgent Appeals Programme

Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia

)

 

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-118-2010
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.