The Friday incident at Tinkune was as condemnable as it was revealing of serious lapses in governance and administrative capacity. Allowing two politically opposed groups to stage demonstrations on the same day should have demanded careful planning and sensitivity from both the ruling parties and the Home Administration. However, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak failed to manage the situation effectively.
Provocative speeches delivered at events with conflicting ideologies contributed directly to the escalation of violence. While diversity of opinion is acceptable, the ruling parties’ casual approach to these events was confirmed by the deployment of security forces. The government also failed to equip and strategize its personnel properly, as evidenced by the untimely use of expired tear gas and arbitrary detentions of some uninvolved youth in the evening.
The royalist program on Friday descended into chaos. While the government designated a venue for a peaceful event, organizers either failed to control their crowd or deliberately incited disorder. The question now arises: can the royalist organizers take full responsibility for the resulting killings, looting, and arson?
The inability to manage their own events led to ‘anarchic crowds’ destroying both private and public property. Tragically, one protester and one journalist lost their lives. A journalist was killed in a brutal attack at her home, while five others are reported critically injured. Damage occurred across media offices, pharmaceutical industries, commercial buildings, and private residences.
Durga Prasai, the public commander of the royalist movement, played a direct role in this chaos. When security personnel blocked access to restricted areas, he attempted to drive a vehicle through police barricades, provoking further unrest. His aggressive actions contributed significantly to the escalation.
Police responded with indiscriminate tear gas, batons, and boots, which further intensified the disorder. Videos of the incident show that the administration failed to systematically control the crowd. Looting, targeting private homes, and stockpiling tear gas for attacks suggest that multiple actors with distinct agendas were involved. The government has yet to identify these groups responsible for incitement.
The frustration of youth, already aggravated by the dominance of top leaders from the three main parties, was exploited during Friday’s events under Prasai’s command. The state must now act swiftly, implementing legal action against groups inciting chaos while ensuring that innocent youths are not arbitrarily detained or intimidated. Police must exercise restraint in all enforcement activities.
The root cause of youth frustration in Nepal remains unemployment and poverty. Some leaders, repeatedly occupying top state positions and creating disorder through partisan networks, exacerbate the problem. Without constitutional reforms to limit tenure and implement merit-based participation in policymaking and governance, political instability and unrest are likely to continue.
The Friday incident demonstrates how remnants of anarchic activities—like vehicle arson, road blockades, and tire burning—once associated with political parties, are now being replicated by royalist factions attempting to manipulate youth discontent. Constitutional amendments are needed to allow leadership and policy implementation for fixed terms based on competence, skills, and expertise, thereby preventing misuse of power and reducing potential for future unrest.
