The report of the judicial commission formed to investigate the September Gen Z protests states that the Nepali Army had prior information that the September 8 demonstration could see dangerous escalation.

Although the report submitted by the former judge of the Special Court, Gauri Bahadur Karki, would be made public by the interim government led by Sushila Karki, it surfaced through various media outlets on Wednesday.

After the report’s unauthorised publication, the government on Wednesday evening decided to release not only the Karki commission’s findings but also the reports of High-Level Investigation Commission on the Nepal Child Organisation and Balmandir, 2020, along with the Good Governance Roadmap, 2025, prepared by the Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers.

The three-member commission, led by Karki, conducted inquiries into the incident by questioning a wide range of key figures. These included then-prime minister KP Sharma Oli, his home minister Ramesh Lekhak, Nepali Army chief Ashok Raj Sigdel, former Inspector General of Nepal Police Chandra Kuber Khapung, Armed Police Force Chief Raju Aryal, as well as Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba, leader of the main opposition Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Rastriya Swatantra Party chair Rabi Lamichhane, and then-Kathmandu mayor Balendra Shah, who is set to take the oath of office as prime minister on Friday.

During questioning by the commission, Chief of Army Staff Sigdel stated that he had received information a day before the protests that the movement could intensify. According to the report, at a meeting of the Central Security Committee held on September 7, they were informed by the National Investigation Department and other security agencies that the protests could escalate.

However, Sigdel also noted in his statement that no meeting of the National Security Council had been convened at that time, which meant that strategic-level discussions could not take place.

The responsibility of convening the National Security Council lies with the prime minister.

Meanwhile, during his summons before the commission months later, Oli was asked why he had not convened the National Security Council and instructed the deployment of the army to immediately bring the situation under control. In response, Oli said that he had no intention of mobilising the army and therefore did not call such a meeting, the report said.

“In his capacity as chair of the National Security Council, the prime minister had the authority to convene a meeting and issue directives. However, the government’s priority was to ensure minimal use of force and to avoid human casualties. As there was no intention on the part of the government to deploy the army, such a step was not taken,” Oli has stated in his summons statement.

He added that the Nepali Army’s recommendation aligned with this approach.

Oli also stated that he viewed the arson and attacks on all three branches of the state—the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary—as premeditated acts.

Following his resignation as prime minister on the second day of the Gen Z protests, incidents of arson targeted key government institutions, including the Supreme Court, the Parliament building, and Singha Durbar. On September 8, a total of 19 demonstrators—17 in Kathmandu and two in Jhapa—lost their lives. The following day, on September 9, enraged protesters carried out the attacks.

During the youth-led protests, a total of 77 people lost their lives, while government and private property worth billions were destroyed.

In relation to the incident, the report has recommended that Oli, Lekhak, and then-police chief Khapung be charged under Sections 181 and 182 of the criminal code for criminal negligence, with a proposed prison sentence of up to 10 years.

The report has also recommended action against then-home secretary Gokarna Mani Dawadi, Armed Police Force chief Raju Aryal; former head of the National Investigation Department Hutaraj Thapa; and then-chief district officer of Kathmandu Chhabi Rijal. It suggests that they be prosecuted under Section 182 of the National Penal Code.

The report also recommends that other government officials found responsible for the incident be dealt with under the respective laws governing their organisations.

In the case of Nepal Police AIG and current IGP Dan Bahadur Karki, the report suggests that he be issued a formal reprimand. Legal experts note that such reprimands can have implications for promotions within an organisation.

Similarly, Narayan Dutta Poudel of the Armed Police Force—who is in line to become a future chief—has also been named for such a reprimand. While this may no longer have any significant impact on Karki, it could pose challenges for Poudel’s promotion if the report is implemented.

According to a member of the investigation commission, there were public concerns about possible infiltration into the protests. He said the commission made an effort to address this aspect while preparing the report. However, he claimed that their investigation found no evidence to support the kind of organised infiltration alleged publicly.

That said, he noted a striking pattern in arson incidents targeting institutions and individuals. Speaking to the Post, the commission member explained that investigators observed a similar modus operandi used by protesters across different locations.

“The pattern involved first disabling CCTV cameras at the targeted house, then draining water from the property’s water tank, burning documents, moving into the kitchen to cut the gas pipe and set the house on fire, and finally torching vehicles on the premises before leaving,” the commission member said.

The government, however, maintains that it intended to release the report but was unable to do so for various reasons.

The interim government formed the three-member commission on September 21, with former Nepal Police AIG Bigyan Raj Sharma and senior advocate Bishweshwar Prasad Bhandari as members. The commission took longer than the three months initially given and submitted its report to the government only on March 8 after multiple tenure extensions. Subsequently, the Cabinet meeting on March 15 decided to make the report public after reviewing it.

Following that Cabinet meeting, Home Minister Om Prakash Aryal, also the role government spokesperson, told the media on March 16 that further details about the report would be shared.

A Cabinet decision is generally made public after it is certified by the chief secretary. However, the press briefing scheduled to release the report on March 15 did not take place citing that the chief secretary had not certified the decision. A source privy to the developments also noted that the government faced other difficulties in making the report public.

The source, asking not to be named to speak on the sensitive matter, further said that a few days earlier, the heads of security agencies had met with Prime Minister Karki and warned that if the report were released and implemented, it could trigger unrest within the security apparatus. This, they reportedly argued, placed additional pressure on the government not to make the report public.

In addition, the source noted that the National Human Rights Commission's release of the synopsis of its report on the Gen Z protests had caused significant turbulence within the bureaucracy and security forces, further increasing pressure on the government to withhold the commission’s report.