AN INDEPENDENT VOICE OF PUBLIC.
The ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has repeatedly urged the government to investigate actions affecting media organisations and journalists, but questions remain over whether those directives have produced meaningful action. The issue has renewed scrutiny of the relationship between the governing party and the administration led by Prime Minister Balen Shah.
In a report published in Kathmandu on November 3, the party’s interventions were described as having received little response from the government. The concerns centre on three episodes: obstruction outside media organisations, police action involving journalists, and a controversy surrounding an audio recording linked to lawmaker Khagendra Sunar.
Earlier Obstruction Outside Media Offices
The report says vehicles were parked in front of the entrances of several media organisations and a residence associated with the Nepali Congress president on Ashar 29, 2083. RSP General Secretary Bipin Acharya subsequently issued a statement calling for those responsible to be identified and dealt with under the law.
The party said interference with media organisations and pressure on journalists were incompatible with democratic values and called on the government, the Home Ministry and security agencies to ensure the physical and psychological safety of media workers.
However, the report alleges that no effective investigation or action followed, even after vehicle ownership details were made public. Those claims have not been independently established in the material reviewed for this article and should be treated as allegations pending official clarification.
Journalist Detentions Prompt Fresh Directive
The dispute resurfaced after security personnel entered media offices and detained or attempted to detain journalists.
The report identifies journalist Bishwamani Subedi, editor Shobharaj Baral and editor-in-chief Dhiraj Basnet among those affected in separate incidents. It also says police went to the office of a newspaper seeking to take a journalist into custody without an arrest warrant.
The RSP objected to the actions and convened a secretariat meeting. The party concluded that reported police activities on Kartik 13, 2083, were contrary to the Constitution and its own principles, and directed the government to identify those who issued the orders, investigate the matter and take strict action.
Separate reporting confirms that the RSP publicly called for an investigation into police interference in newsrooms and the detention of journalists. The party's spokesperson said press freedom, freedom of expression, the rule of law and human rights must be respected.
Questions Over Responsibility and Follow-Through
The government's response has been disputed. The report says the Prime Minister's Secretariat stated that the prime minister had not been informed about the journalist detentions, while police administration was reported to have said the action had been taken in line with the Prime Minister's Office's wishes. These accounts have not been reconciled in the information reviewed.
The RSP's directive also drew attention within the party to the question of who should be held accountable. Independent reporting on the party's secretariat meeting said members discussed seeking an explanation from Home Minister Sudan Gurung, while the final decision addressed the government as a whole.
The report further says the party had earlier raised concerns about a disputed audio recording involving lawmaker Khagendra Sunar and called for an independent, impartial investigation. It alleges that no government investigation followed. No official finding on the recording is established in the material reviewed.
The central question is now whether the government will act on the governing party's calls for investigation and accountability.
Until the authorities clarify what inquiries have been opened and whether anyone has been held responsible, the gap between party directives and government action is likely to remain a subject of political debate.
Join the conversation
Comments are reviewed before publication. Your email stays private.