Allegations Must Be Investigated Impartially, Not Judged by Political Parties

When serious allegations are made against a person holding public office, it is natural for citizens to demand accountability. Following the release of an audio recording allegedly linked to Rastriya Swatantra Party lawmaker Khagendra Sunar, the same question has resurfaced: should the party investigate the allegations on its own, or should state agencies also fulfil their responsibility?

The RSP has begun an internal inquiry and directed Sunar not to attend formal public events until it is completed. Sunar, meanwhile, has denied being the person heard in the recording, claimed that he is being targeted as part of a conspiracy and said he is ready to cooperate with an impartial investigation. These are the positions of the two sides. The authenticity of the audio and the identity of the voice remain to be established through independent examination.

In such circumstances, treating the allegations as proof of guilt would be unjust. But refusing to investigate simply because the accused is a lawmaker would also run counter to justice and public accountability. Police say no formal complaint has been filed so far. Legal procedures must be followed, but the state cannot remain indefinitely inactive on a serious matter raised publicly simply because no complaint has been lodged. The relevant authorities should clarify what the law requires regarding a formal complaint and what powers the state has to examine the available information at a preliminary stage.

An internal party inquiry can address discipline, membership and a member’s public role. It cannot replace an impartial investigation into a possible criminal offence. A state investigation must be free from political pressure, partisan loyalties and social media speculation. The recording’s authenticity, whether it was edited or artificially generated, the identity of the voice and the context of the conversation must all be examined on the basis of evidence. No one should be declared guilty before the allegations are proven; if evidence supports them, the legal process should proceed.

Audio controversies involving political leaders and public officials are not new in Nepal. In the past, such disputes have led to resignations, investigations and court proceedings. But if public attention repeatedly fades after a few days while institutional conclusions remain unclear, citizens’ trust will erode. When the same standards are not applied to everyone, justice begins to appear partisan.

Patriotism does not mean protecting people from one’s own political camp or celebrating when opponents face allegations. Commitment to the country means placing the Constitution, the law and respect for citizens above party interests. If a woman has been threatened or insulted, her safety and dignity must be protected. If the allegations are baseless or the material is fabricated, the accused person’s reputation and legal rights must also be safeguarded. Both require an impartial investigation.

The responsibility of the government and police is to establish the truth, not to protect a party’s image. The RSP is responsible for making its inquiry into its lawmaker transparent. Parliament and political parties should also establish clear standards for the conduct of public officials. Only impartial investigations and equal treatment under the law can strengthen public trust. Allegations must be judged by evidence and law, not by slogans, partisanship or party statements.