Inside Nepal’s Gen Z Commission Findings
A report making headlines in Nepal has received both praise and criticism. It relates to the investigation carried out by the commission into the killings and damages during the Gen Z movement on 8 and 9 September 2025.
Not only the content of the report but also how it reached the public from government shelves has been a subject of debate. The commission, led by former Judge Gauri Bahadur Karki, submitted its report to the government on 8 March 2026. Although the government was expected to release the report publicly, it was the media that did so. The publication Jana Aastha, led by veteran journalist Kishor Shrestha, began sharing excerpts from the report before the full text was made public.
Immediate Recommendations
The report is filled with testimonies from prominent politicians and administrators, including then-Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, then-Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, new Prime Minister and former Kathmandu Mayor Balen Shah, president of the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) Rabi Lamichhane, Army Chief Ashok Raj Sigdel, and Police Chief Chandra Kuber Khapung, among others.
Oli has denied any wrongdoing in handling the protests, according to the report. He argued that the use of fire is “not a matter connected to the prime minister directly. The prime minister does not give orders to the police; for this, the Ministry of Home Affairs remains the departmental ministry,” the report quoted. Oli also reportedly said that security agencies misinformed him, claiming that only a few thousand youths were joining the protests on 8 September.
Prime Minister Shah stated that he considers the deaths of youngsters caused by suppression on September 8 as the main cause of the destruction on September 9.
Lamichhane, who was in Nakkhu prison on charges of cooperative fraud, was escorted out of the prison on 9 September. He emphasised that it was not his wish but the crowd’s.
Then-Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak said that infiltration was the primary cause of the protests escalating into a violent uprising. “The use of force is a matter to be decided by the officers deployed on the ground based on situational circumstances, and there is no practice of the Home Minister giving direct orders in such matters,” he stated regarding his role in the shootings.
The chief of the Nepal Army, Ashok Raj Sigdel, testified that the army exercised utmost restraint to minimise human loss.
Then-Police Chief Chandra Kuber Khapung told the commission that opening fire by the police was the need of the hour. “Upon learning that protesters had entered inside the Parliament premises by breaking the security cordon, I gave instructions to deploy police with restraint according to the Local Administration Act,” he said, according to the report.
The commission recommended criminal investigations into the roles played by then-Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli, then-Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, and then-Police Chief Chandra Kuber Khapung, as well as those who held positions such as chief of the National Investigations Department, home secretary, chief of the Armed Police Force (APF), and chief district officer of Kathmandu during the Gen Z protests. It also suggested departmental action against four Nepal Police officers and three APF officers.
Furthermore, it recommended action under the Military Act against four Nepali Army commanders for failing to safeguard the parliament building and Singha Durbar.
The report estimated the total physical damage to be 2.81 million USD (48.9 billion Nepali rupees).
Reform Proposals
Based on its mandate to “present measures and suggestions to be adopted to prevent such incidents from recurring in the future”, the commission made recommendations for governance reform, attributing the governance issue as the primary cause behind the incidents during the protests.
Noting that the Gen Z movement was driven by a “20.36 per cent” youth unemployment rate and Nepal’s poor ranking in corruption control, the commission recommended reforms across all three branches of government: legislative, executive, and judiciary.
Some reform proposals include preventing members of parliament from becoming ministers, which would require a constitutional amendment, and requiring two months of training for all elected officials before they take their oaths. To encourage independent lawmaking, the report suggests removing party whips when parliamentarians vote on a bill. It also recommends ending political “quotas” in judge appointments. Highlighting the “148,000 pending cases,” the report calls for setting mandatory timelines for case disposal.
Recommendations include but are not limited to professionalising public service delivery to ensure result-oriented administration; enforcing strict transparency and accountability measures within the private and banking sectors to curb the influence of “interest groups” on policy; implementing a comprehensive regulatory framework for the cooperative sector to protect small depositors from fraud; creating a national code of conduct for journalists and media houses to address the spread of AI-generated misinformation and digital incitement; streamlining NGO and INGO management to align foreign-funded projects with national development priorities; introducing an open-prison system and mandatory mental health counselling for inmates to modernise the rehabilitative system; and establishing a Truth and Reconciliation mechanism to address grievances and provide reparations for the physical and human losses of the September 2025 events.
Reception and Concerns
As expected, the Unified Marxist-Leninists (UML) and its chairman, Oli, condemned the recommendations for criminal investigation and punitive measures. The UML remains isolated, as no other major parties have strongly opposed these recommendations.
However, the report has received criticism from the public concerning its objectivity. The uneven treatment among the security forces, favouring the army, has sparked debate about the report’s bias. Supporters emphasise that the army played a minimal role in managing public protests.
Critics have noted that the report focuses on the deaths of September 8 but pays little attention to the arson and destruction on September 9. There are several instances where individuals engaged in burning and damaging public and private property, while others openly called for violence.
The Nepal Bar Association condemned the report for portraying “the independent judiciary and the independent legal profession” negatively. The bar brought the report to the attention of the Supreme Court. Journalists also criticised the commission’s report for recommending “mandatory bachelor’s” and “15 years of experience” requirements to qualify as a journalist.
The report’s focus on broader systemic flaws as major causes of the protests is also facing criticism for a lack of specificity on the matter under investigation.
Another concern is the implementation of the recommendations. Nepal now has a new cabinet ready to govern the country for the next five years. Implementation depends on the new government’s approach to the report. Even if the government moves forward, such actions could increase political tension, as the report recommended criminal investigations against prominent opposition leaders, including former PM Oli.
Since the report also highlights shortcomings of the Nepal Police while recommending actions against its officials, its reception within the institution responsible for state-led investigations will have an impact.
Notably, the commission identified the involvement of a group called the “Tibetan Original Blood – TOB” in inciting violence. Reports suggest the group sympathises with the “Free Tibet Movement”, while Nepal officially recognises Tibet as part of China. Situating the implementation of the report’s findings within Nepal’s geopolitical context will require careful observation of the new government’s policies and actions.
The first meeting of the new cabinet has decided to implement the findings of the investigation on behalf of all individuals and organisations except those associated with security agencies. In the case of the security sector, a study committee will be formed, and actions will be taken based on the recommendations submitted by that committee, according to Sasmit Pokharel, the new education minister and government spokesperson.
