By Rabi Raj Thapa
Overall, what people witnessed in the Tarai districts is a poor example of the state of public order management. The government should not treat curfew as the only option, especially as a means of covering up its failure to carry out its proactive and preventive duty to serve and govern the people it is supposed to protect and facilitate.
The Constitution of Nepal (Part 3, Articles 16–31) guarantees every Nepali citizen numerous fundamental rights, along with a few fundamental duties. Among these, the rights to freedom of expression and religious observance have become the most abused and exploited.
According to media reports, during their celebration, members of the Muslim community hoisted Muslim flags with the permission of local elected representatives. However, they did not remove the flags after their programme had ended. Later, Bol Bam devotees arrived and attempted to hoist Hindu flags in the same area while playing loud music. In the ensuing confrontation, some of them were allegedly beaten by Muslim youths. When they later approached the Muslim neighbourhood, they were reportedly attacked again, while the alleged perpetrators tactically withdrew, leaving the Bol Bam devotees angry and frustrated. Where, then, do religious tolerance and mutual respect stand in such circumstances?
Incidentally or by design, all the lights reportedly went off when personnel from the Nepal Police and the Armed Police Force arrived in the troubled area. The police were then left to deal with angry youths, which ultimately resulted in police firing.
It all sounds like a real-life drama—whether accidental, coincidental, conspiratorial, or orchestrated. This is the heart of the matter. The ball is now in the government’s court, along with the concerned stakeholders, to uncover the truth. It is futile to keep issuing one statement after another without addressing the underlying issues.
The Nepali people need to learn lessons from past failures that led to the violence and mayhem of March 28 in Tinkune and the unrest of September 8 and 9 in 2025 across Nepal.
It is now alarming to see curfews being imposed so easily and arbitrarily. While it may be easy for the government to declare a curfew, it must also recognize and assess its broader impact and implications. Government authorities need to assess and understand the psychological fear, deprivation, and uncertainty that curfews create in people’s daily lives. Student miss school, daily wage earners lose their income, women are unable to carry out their daily household chores, and even livestock suffer because they cannot graze.
This time, many prominent leaders from the Tarai have expressed concerns in the media about the rationale for deploying the Nepal Army during the curfew. They may be right to some extent. The Nepal Army should not be deployed so readily in response to local riots.
It is all too easy to impose a curfew in the name of safety and security. It is also easier to mobilize uniformed forces than to win the hearts and minds of Nepal’s simple and peace-loving people. It is disturbing to see a democratically elected government becoming increasingly reliant on the Nepal Army, even in local incidents where the Nepal Police and the Armed Police Force should be capable of handling the situation. Well-trained and professionally competent police officers are generally better equipped in the measured use of force, negotiation, and maintaining law and order—whether through crime intelligence and surveillance, crowd and riot control, communal conflict management, or public dispute resolution.
The present federal government appears to have seriously undermined the roles and jurisdictions of local and provincial governments, as stipulated under Nepal’s three-tier federal governance structure.
Law enforcement personnel need to shake off any trigger-happy mindset and behaviour. Likewise, the Nepal Government and local administrations need to abandon their curfew-friendly, curfew-happy mentality and avoid relying on military deployment for small-scale riot control operations.
Most importantly, effective intelligence is essential for proactive public safety and security measures. It enables law enforcement agencies to identify potential threats and hotspots and to take appropriate action before incidents escalate into violent confrontations.
Finally, preventing conflict requires a political solution, not merely a police or military response.
Login to add a comment