KATHMANDU, April 1 As the dust seemingly settles after the violent incidents that occurred during the pro-monarchy protest in the Tinkune area of the capital on Friday, where two individuals died and scores were injured, contradictory remarks on what triggered the violence have emerged across social media platforms.
Government authorities and police have blamed the pro-monarchy rioteers for instigating the violence while the supporters of former King Gyanendra Shah pointed their fingers at the police for inciting violence.
While the two groups disagree over the cause of the violence, they agree that the police displayed crucial lapses at management in the protest. High-ranking police officials, both in-service and retired, readily agree that the lack of equipment and diminishing morale of the police force were the key reasons behind the police’s inability to control the pro-monarchy crowd.
Spokesperson for the Nepal Police Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Dinesh Kumar Acharya told Republica that the police failed to bring the situation under control due to the deficiencies in operational efficiency and morale.
He admitted that the operational efficiency in crowd management was due to the incapability to anticipate the violence and failure to form a contingency plan in case the rioteers used the objects in their surroundings, including stones and bricks, as weapons.
Former DIG Hemanta Malla added that police personnel on-duty have been demoralized to take quick-decisions in accordance to the circumstances that arise during protest due to a recent history of reprimanding police officials for actions taken in crowd management.
Former chief of the District Police Range (DPR), then Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Siddhi Bikram Shah, was transferred to the headquarters following his directive to open fire during a protest in Balkumari, Lalitpur in December 2023.
Former DIG Malla added that the lack of soft-equipment for crowd management also escalated the situation as the police had to directly transition into baton charge, tear-gas shelling and opening fire.
Beyond these two major technical lapses of police in managing the protest, security experts have pointed out the blunder in anticipation, division of police force, lack of contingency plans, possible infiltration by other groups, and lack of experience and expertise of the police command and personnel on duty as major slips in crowd management during the incident.
Blunders in anticipation
Former Additional Inspector General (AIG) of Police Pushkar Karki, an experienced expert in crowd management, pointed out the oversight in crowd analysis and crowd management as the reasons behind why the pro-monarchy protest went out of hand.
“The police could neither anticipate the number of protestors nor the anarchist tendency of the protestors,” former AIG Karki told Republica, “In addition, they failed to anticipate the multiplicity of locations of protest even after dispersion of the crowd.”
Former DIG Malla opined that the police made a blunder in selecting the Tinkune area as the location of the protest. “The Tinkune area is close to the airport as well as the Parliament building,” he said, “Such a sensitive area should not have been selected as the protest site.”
Spokesperson for the Kathmandu Valley Police Office (KVPO) SSP Shekhar Khanal told Republica the protest went out of hand after the organizers deviated from a prior agreement of holding a peaceful demonstration.
“The Joint People’s Movement Committee had agreed to hold a peaceful protest in Tinkune but ended up inciting violence by attempting to force into restricted areas,” SSP Khanal said.
Division of force
Security experts have also pointed out that the division of the police force across two different protests on the same day at two different spots over four kilometers away also fueled the incapability of the police to control the pro-monarchy crowd.
According to Superintendent of Police (SP) Apil Raj Bohara at the Kathmandu District Police Range, over 3000 police personnel were mobilized by the range to manage the two protests.
Former DIG Malla explained that since some of the available manpower was stationed in the Thapathali-Tripureshwar-Shahid Gate-Exhibition Road area, they were unable to control the protest.
“The crowd management was also challenging because some of the police were diverted to the pro-Republic rally organized the Socialist Front,” he said, “One of the reasons of the insufficient number of police personnel at the pro-monarchy protest was the Socialist Front’s decision to hold their show of force on the same day in the capital.”
DIG Acharya and SSP Khanal, however, claimed that the number of police personnel mobilized at the rally was sufficient and the situation became unmanageable due to the violent intent of the crowd.
Contingency plans
Another major lapse in the security plan for the protest was the police negligence in formulating contingency plans in case of possible violence. While the police’s blunder of lack of anticipation of the use of violence by the protesters was a weakness in crowd analysis, the lack of contingency plans thereof, resulted in the spread of violent activities across the southeast parts of the capital.
A former AIG told Republica that although the police did not anticipate the element of violence in the rally, the Kathmandu DPR should have still created contingency plans to control the situation within the protest site if the violence escalated.
“If there were contingency plans in place, the looting of Bhatbhateni and disruption of flights at the Tribhuvan International Airport would not have taken place,” he said, “The torching of vehicles and buildings too would not have taken place.”
DIG Acharya stated that the police were also not prepared to face the onslaught of stones and bricks hurled by the protesters. “We should have had a contingency plan in place to face the bricks and stones since there were construction sites in the area with a plethora of building materials that the protesters could readily use to attack the police personnel,” he said.
Intent and Infiltration
While the police officials in service have claimed that the very intention of the pro-monarchy protesters had always been to incite violence, some former police officials argue that the violence during Friday’s demonstration was instigated by infiltrators.
DIG Acharya claimed that the protesters had arrived in Tinkune with the intention of instigating violence.
“The way that the protesters attempted to force into the restricted area within an hour of assembling and their instant reaction of damaging property and torching vehicles show that they intended to incite violence during the protest,” he said, “Why else would they start throwing furniture and other materials from the window of a house.”
Confirming that many protests in the past turned violent due to infiltrators in the demonstrations, former DIG Malla told Republica that there were some signs of the presence of infiltrators in the Tinkune incident.
“It seems not all the protesters were pro-monarchy supporters,” he said, “The looting of Bhatbhateni and theft of private property from houses shows that some of the protesters had material gain in mind.”