Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Nepal): Police refused to register First Information Report (FIR) into the custodial death of a girl in Kavre, Dhulikhel

UPDATE (Nepal): Police refused to register First Information Report (FIR) into the custodial death of a girl in Kavre, Dhulikhel

November 16, 2005

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Update on Urgent Appeal

16 November 2005
[RE: UA-22-2004: NEPAL: Three young persons shot dead by security personnel and a girl among the victims was gang-raped before being killed in Pokahari Chauri-4, Kavre District]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-136-2005: NEPAL: Police refused to register First Information Report (FIR) into the custodial death of a girl in Kavre, Dhulikhel

NEPAL: Torture; custodial death; abduction; extra-judicial killing; obstruction of justice; rule of law
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that the District Police Office (DPO) in Kavre, Dhulikhel refused to register the First Information Report (FIR) that the mother of murdered Maina Sunuwar wanted to lodge to initiate investigations into her daughter's death in custody of the Royal Nepalese Army.

Fifteen-year old Maina Sunuwar, the daughter of Devi Sunuwar, was arrested by a group of around 15 Royal Nepalese Army personnel at her home in Kharelthok, Kare, on 17 February 2004.  The soldiers were looking for Maina's mother, Devi Sunuwar, who had reportedly witnessed the gang rape and killing of her niece by security personnel earlier the same month. (Please view our urgent appeal on this case UA-22-2004).  The family have attempted to establish her whereabouts and visited the Lamidada army barracks, the Dhulikhel Police Office and Shanti Gate army barracks, but officials repeatedly denied that she was being detained there.  Witnesses, however, alleged that two girls had been brought into the Shanti Gate army camp on the morning of February 17 in a vehicle reportedly driven by an officer named Captain Niranjan.

Reports indicate that Maina was blindfolded, tied to trees and beaten for hours.  On April 21 a national weekly published a letter, allegedly signed by members of the army, in which it is claimed that Maina was tortured and killed as a result of electric shocks applied to her breasts.  Since her disappearance the security forces have provided different stories to the family members ranging from denying they had arrested and detained Maina, to her having been killed in an encounter with the security forces.  What is more, the Police have also claimed that they have conducted a post mortem examination on Maina's body and then handed it over to her family.  But the family has yet to receive the body and there is absolutely no evidence that a post mortem examination has been conducted. 

It was only in October 2005 that the army made a public statement announcing that Maina was found dead in an unspecified army barracks and that three officers, Colonel Babi Khatri, Captain Amit Pun and Captain Sunil Adhikary, were found guilty of the improper conduct in relation to Maina's killing during a military court martial and were sentenced to between 6 months and 2 years imprisonment.  The question of improper conduct reportedly related to the fact that the officers did not conduct a post mortem examination or hand the body over to the victim's family and not concerning the fact that Maina was forcibly abducted from her home and allegedly tortured to death.  For that offence so far no-one has been made accountable. 

We feel that such action by the Nepalese forces is not satisfactory since, according to Nepalese law including the Army Act of Nepal, military courts do not have jurisdiction over major crimes such as rape or murder against civilians committed by military personnel.  Thus, the murder of Maina must be tried in a regular civilian court.

Devi Sunuwar has attempted to have the case brought before a civilian court and approached the District Police Office (DPO) in Dhulikhel to ask for an investigation into the case.  However, the police have refused to register the complaint and to provide a receipt, which is required as per the law.  This demonstrates how difficult it is for victims of human rights violations to gain access to justice mechanisms in the country. 

Several prominent human rights organizations in Nepal and a representative from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights were present when Devi Sunuwar went to the DPO. Despite this Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy.S. P.) Sanjaya Singh Basnet refused to register the case due to the involvement of the military, and that it was even too sensitive to explain why the case was being refused.  According to Nepalese law (State Cases Act) the police have to register any information regarding a crime of this nature and they have to provide the receipt of the registration to those who have provided the information.  The action of Dy.S.P.Sanjaya was in direct contravention of the State Cases Act and indicates the apparent disregard that state officials show concerning the law in the country.

Devi Sunuwar then went to the Chief District Officer (CDO) at the District Administrative Office who registered the complaint, but stated that it had no legal validity since according to the State Cases Act the complaint has to be registered by the police. This is not correct: under the provisions of the State Cases Act, if a police officer refuses to register a complaint, the complainant can go to a higher police authority or the CDO to have the complaint registered. 

The AHRC are very concerned with this case, it has been over a year now since the alleged torture and murder of Maina Sunuwar but no satisfactory or transparent investigation has been launched, or action taken against the perpetrators.  We therefore call upon your immediate action to write to the relevant authorities urging them to order the registration of the FIR in question.    We also ask for a prompt and impartial investigation to be launched into Maina Sunuwar's death and for the perpetrators to be brought before a competent civilian court.  If proven guilty, the perpetrators must be sentenced under the provisions of the law and the victim's family must be awarded prompt and adequate reparation.  Once a date is scheduled for the hearing, the trial must be fair and impartial, only then can justice be achieved. More importantly, protection must be offered to Maina Sunuwar's family and all persons assisting them in lodging the complaint concerning Maina's death. 

Finally, the AHRC realizes that this is just one of many of cases concerning the problems that prevail in Nepal, notably: arrest and illegal detention by the Royal Nepalese Army; forced disappearances; brutal torture, including that resulting in custodial death; and the total impunity that the perpetrators are able to enjoy for these grave acts.  We therefore call on you to urge the authorities in Nepal to ensure that the practice of unconstitutional and illegal detention of civilians by the armed forces is immediately halted, and that any allegations of torture, rape and custodial death by the armed forces are fully and transparently investigated by an independent body and are tried before a civilian court. 


Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
----------------------------------

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send a letter to Mr. Ian Martin, Chief of Mission Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights - Nepal Office, and other concerned government agencies to raise your concern on this case.

Sample letter:

Dear Mr. Ian Martin,

Re: NEPAL: Police refused to register First Information Report (FIR) into the custodial death of a girl in Kavre, Dhulikhel

I write to express my deep concern and disappointment that the case of Maina Sunuwar, who was allegedly abducted and murdered by military personnel, has still not been heard in the civilian courts.  It is my understanding that according to Nepalese law all cases of severe criminal acts such as rape and murder against civilians committed by military personnel have to be heard in a civilian court. 

According to the information I have received, Devi Sunuwar, the mother of Maina Sunuwar, tried to lodge a First Information Report with the District Police Office in Kavre. The Dy. S. P. not only refused to register the case but failed to give a reason for refusing.  This is a violation of the State Cases Act, which states that the police have to register any information regarding a crime of this nature and that they have to also provide receipt of the registration to those who provide the information.  Even though the Chief District Officer has registered the complaint, but he claims that it is only valid if the police register the complaint as well.  This is not correct: under the provisions of the State Cases Act, if a police officer refuses to register a complaint, the complainant can go to a higher police authority or the CDO to have the complaint registered. 

I therefore write to urge you to put pressure on the relevant authorities to allow for the FIR to be registered with the police, so that a prompt and impartial investigation can be launched into Maina Sunuwar's death and the perpetrators can brought before a competent civilian court.  If proven guilty, the perpetrators must be sentenced under the provisions of the law and the victim's family must be awarded prompt and adequate reparation.  Once a date is scheduled for the hearing, the trial must be fair and impartial, only then can justice be achieved. More importantly, protection must be offered to Maina Sunuwar's family and all persons assisting them in lodging the complaint concerning Maina's death, as there is fear that the Nepalese military will retaliate against the family if they continue with their actions. 

Finally, I realize this is just one of many cases of human rights violations in Nepal. These include: arrest and illegal detention by the Royal Nepalese Army; forced disappearances; brutal torture, including that resulting in custodial death; and are accompanied by impunity for the perpetrators of these grave acts. I therefore ask you to take appropriate measures to help ensure that the practice of unconstitutional and illegal detention of civilians by the armed forces is immediately halted, and that any allegations of torture, rape and custodial death by the armed forces are fully and transparently investigated by an independent body and are tried before a civilian court. 

I look forward to your immediate intervention in this matter.


Yours sincerely,


_______________

------------------
PLEASE SEND A LETTER TO:

Mr. Ian Martin
Chief of Mission
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights- Nepal Office
UN House, Pulchowk
Kathmandu
NEPAL
Tel: (977) 1 5524 366 or 5523 200
Fax: (977) 1 5523 991 or 5523 986
Email: hrinfounit@undp.org

PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:

1. His Majesty King Gyanendra
Narayanhity Royal Palace
Durbar Marg
Kathmandu
NEPAL
Tel: 977 14 413577/227577
Fax: 977 14 227395/ 411955

2. Major General Sharma Thappa
Attn: Officer of Royal Nepal Army Human Rights Cell
Human Rights Cell
Singha Durbar
Kathmandu
NEPAL
Telefax: + 977 14 245 020/226 292

3. Mahadeo Prasad Yadav
Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Ramshahpath, Kathmandu
NEPAL
Tel: +977 14 262548 (direct line)/262394 (through Personal Assistant)
Fax: +977 14 262582
Email: fpattorney@most.gov.np

4. Mr. Nain Bahadur Khatri
Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission
Pulchowck, Lalitpur
NEPAL
Tel: +977 1 5 547 974 or 525 659 or 547 975
Fax: +9771 5 547 973
Email: nhrc@ntc.net.np

5. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Atten: Lydie Ventre
Room 3-016
c/o OHCHR-UNOG, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 917 9155
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (general)
E-mail: urgent-action@ohchr.org,

6. Ms. Yakin Erturk
Special Rapporteur on Elimination of violence against women
c/o Ms Lucinda Ohanlon
Room 3-042
OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9615
Fax: +41 22 917 9006
Email: lohanlon@ohchr.org

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-136-2005
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.