This page summarizes cases raised with Nepal by the Special Rapporteur between May 1, 2011, (when the Special Rapporteur took up his functions) and February 28, 2017 (the date of the last public release of communications). Communications are released to the public once per year. This page also contains observations on these communications and on responses received from Nepal.
Communications and observations are divided into sections based upon which observation report they originally appeared.
Each communication is referenced as urgent appeal (UA), allegation letter (AL), joint urgent appeal (JUA) and joint allegation letter (JAL) – the hyperlinks lead to these documents. This is followed by the date the communication was issued, as well as the case number and the State reply (also hyperlinked if available).
Summaries and communications are published only in the language of submission (in the case of Nepal, English).
The Special Rapporteur regrets that, at the time of the finalisation of this report, no response had been transmitted to the communication sent during the reporting period. He considers responses to his communications as an important part of the cooperation of Governments with his mandate, and urges the authorities to provide as soon as possible detailed responses to all the concerns raised in the communication due to the serious nature of the allegations received.
The Special Rapporteur remains seriously concerned about the violent dispersal and arrests of peaceful protesters by police forces, including sexual assaults of female protesters. He remains similarly concerned about reports of threats and stigmatising remarks against human rights defenders in the media. Of particular concern are the allegations of calls for “people’s action”, which have led to violent physical attacks of these defenders.
Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur also expresses his concern regarding reports of undue delays in the procedure to renew the registration of the Blue Diamond Society which promotes respect for the rights of LGBTI people. He further expresses his concern regarding arbitrary arrests, harassment, intimidation by the police and ill-treatment in detention of its members. In this regard, he calls upon the authorities to “[t]ake positive measures, including affirmative action measures, to ensure that all individuals belonging to groups most at risk [such as LGBTI people] have the ability to exercise effectively their rights, including to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association” (A/HRC/26/29, para. 73(c)).
The Special Rapporteur recommends that the Government put in place an enabling and safe environment that is conducive to the free expression of civil society allowing individuals to exercise their legitimate right to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association without undue hindrances. A thorough and independent investigation into any allegations of human rights violations, including acts of intimidations or harassments, committed against those exercising their rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, should be conducted; those responsible should be held accountable; and victims should be provided with full redress.
In this regard, the Special Rapporteur refers to Human Rights Council resolution 24/5, and in particular operative paragraph 1 that “[r]eminds States of their obligation to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, online as well as offline, including in the context of elections, and including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law”.
Responses to communications
The Special Rapporteur regrets not having received a response to his communication and reiterates that he views replies to his communications as an essential feature of Government cooperation with his mandate, in accordance with Human Rights Council resolutions 24/5 (2013), 21/16 (2012) and 15/21 (2010).
Management of peaceful protests
The Special Rapporteur expresses concern at the reported prosecution of Mr. Chandra Kant Raut for his role in a peaceful rally in Morang in September 2014 and asks the Government to keep him informed on the outcome of the proceedings and investigations of the case, in the briefest delays. Moreover, he expresses concern at the reported failure of the authorities to respect the right of people to not be deprived arbitrarily of their liberty and, in this regard, stresses the recommendation of the Human Rights Committee that calls upon the Government of Nepal to take appropriate measures to ensure that no one is subject to arbitrary arrest or detention and that detained persons enjoy all legal guarantees (CCPR/C/NPL/CO/2, paragraph 11), in compliance with articles 9 and 14 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Nepal acceded on 14 May 1991.
The Rapporteur reiterates that while the State does not have to agree with the opinions and criticisms expressed by people who embrace different convictions or beliefs, it has a positive obligation to ensure the existence of an enabling environment for civil society, in terms of enjoyment of the rights of peaceful assembly and association, so that it may exist, operate and express itself freely and without fear (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 63).
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of his willingness to undertake a country visit to Nepal, as indicated by his letter on 26 September 2014. He trusts that such a visit would allow him to examine first-hand issues related to his mandate, identify good practices and formulate pertinent recommendations to relevant stakeholders. He looks forward to receiving a positive reply at the earliest possible opportunity. He reiterates that Human Rights Council resolution 15/21, which established his mandate, and 24/5, which renewed it for an additional period of three years, both urge the States to consider favourably his requests for visits.
Response to communication
The Special Rapporteur regrets that he has not yet received a response to his communication sent during the reporting period, and reminds the Government of Nepal that he considers responses to his communications as an important part of the cooperation of governments with his mandate. He looks forward to receiving detailed responses to the questions raised in this letter, at the earliest possible convenience, in conformity with Human Rights Council resolutions 24/5 (2013), 21/16 (2012) and 15/21 (2010).
The Special Rapporteur reiterates his serious concerns about the reported excessive use of force against peaceful demonstrators by police forces in the dispersing of a peaceful protest for Dalit human rights. In this regard, he wishes to refer to the joint he report on the proper management of assemblies he prepared with Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (A/HRC/31/66), which is highly relevant to the present case. With reference to the announcement made in August 2015 by the Government of the establishment of a committee to investigate these allegations, the Special Rapporteur looks forward to receiving detailed information on any progress made in relation to the investigations undertaken.
More generally, the Special Rapporteur also reiterates his concerns about the situation of Dalit human rights defenders, including women human rights defenders, who are most at risk of attacks and retaliation. In this regard, he also reminds the Government of its positive obligation to ensure that civil society, including human rights defenders, can carry out their legitimate work free in a safe and enabling environment without fear of threats or acts of intimidation and harassment of any sort.
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of his pending request to visit Nepal, as indicated by his letter on 26 September 2014. He trusts that such a visit would allow him to examine first-hand issues related to his mandate, identify good practices and formulate pertinent recommendations to relevant stakeholders. He looks forward to receiving a positive reply at the earliest possible opportunity. He reiterates that Human Rights Council resolution 15/21, which established his mandate, and 24/5, which renewed it for an additional period of three years, both call on States to consider favourably his requests for visits.
For the full reports, containing communications, replies and observations for all countries, see the following links: