KATHMANDU, Sept 15: Government records show that 72 people have died so far in connection with the Gen-Z movement. Serious questions have emerged over how gunfire erupted during the September 8 protest, resulting in such heavy casualties. Police have yet to disclose what kind of weapons were used in the incident that left dozens dead.
No authority has been willing to explain how security forces managed the Gen-Z demonstrations. While there are suspicions of lapses in intelligence gathering, nearly 19 people were killed on the spot and more than 100 were injured. It remains unclear whether the responsibility lies solely with the police or whether another group infiltrated the protest.
Experts suggest that automatic weapons may have been used. On that day, police were equipped with rubber bullets, small arms, and the authority to fire warning shots. Yet the high number of injuries has raised questions about what weapons were actually discharged. Was it the INSAS rifle, the SLR, or pistols typically carried by the police? Or was something more lethal involved? The cause of the severe injuries remains uncertain.
Three arrested with automatic weapons in Banke
Another unanswered question is whether police opened fire because they lacked adequate crowd-control equipment. Some suspect that security commandos assigned to protect the Parliament building fired SLR rifles. Others believe that unidentified actors may have fired shots to escalate tensions. The government has pledged a formal investigation, saying facts will be revealed once it is complete.
The Armed Police Force (APF) was also deployed during the protest, but it is not yet known whether they moved to the front line when the shooting began. So far, there is no evidence that the APF fired live rounds. Clarity from the APF on its role is still awaited.
The Gen-Z activists had warned the government three days in advance of their planned demonstration. Calls were widely circulated on social media urging people to gather. Protesters assembled at Maitighar, marched toward Baneshwor, and were joined by groups from Bijulibazar, Babarmahal, Tinkune, and Shankhamul. Police finally confronted the advancing crowd at the gates of Parliament after protesters breached barricades.
Two Gen-Z representatives, Purushottam Yadav and Sabal Gautam, had formally sought permission for the demonstration from the Kathmandu District Administration Office. However, their whereabouts remain unknown, and it has been confirmed that the protest was not under their leadership that day. Kathmandu Chief District Officer Chhabi Rijal had granted permission, as per procedure, after the district security committee reviewed security measures. Field commanders are usually dispatched with full authority to manage such situations.
On that day as well, the authority to open fire appears to have been exercised. By standard protocol, when police are compelled to fire, they are instructed to aim below the knee. However, most protesters were shot in the head. This raises grave concerns about police training and rules of engagement.
Questions have also been raised over why adequate roadblocks were not erected to contain the protest. In past demonstrations near New Baneshwor, police had routinely declared the area around Parliament a restricted zone. The failure to set up sufficient barricades was another lapse. Why were so many security mistakes made that day? Police are expected to conduct an internal review, examining why personnel deployment lagged behind the growing crowd and why live fire was resorted to within just two hours of the protest beginning.
