{"id":17664,"date":"2026-05-28T08:21:06","date_gmt":"2026-05-28T02:36:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=17664"},"modified":"2026-05-28T07:23:10","modified_gmt":"2026-05-28T01:38:10","slug":"bhadra-24-the-truth-i-saw-confirmed-by-the-human-rights-commission","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=17664","title":{"rendered":"Bhadra 24: The Truth I Saw, Confirmed by the Human Rights Commission<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

# Prem Sagar Poudel<\/strong><\/p>\n

In Nepal\u2019s contemporary political history, the events of Bhadra 23 and 24 are not merely ordinary episodes of protest, anger, or a change in power. These events have raised serious questions about the security architecture of the Nepali state, political leadership, civic discontent, organized violence, and the possible dimensions of external influence. At a time when most people were interpreting the events of Bhadra 24 as a spontaneous outburst of anger arising from the repression of Bhadra 23, my article published in Dragon Media concluded that the nature of the event was different.<\/p>\n

In the article titled \u201cA Planned Assault on Nepal\u2019s Sovereignty: American Conspiracy and the Crisis of National Existence,\u201d published in Dragon Media on Ashoj 1, 2082, I analyzed the developments from Bhadra 22 to 24 not merely as an ordinary anti-government movement, but as a \u201ccomplex and planned assault.\u201d In that article, the beginning of the incident, the process of obtaining permission for the demonstration, the abnormality of security preparations, infiltration within the crowd, attacks on state structures, and the similar pattern of destruction seen across the country on Bhadra 24 were presented as indications of a larger plan.<\/p>\n

At that time, this analysis may have appeared uncomfortable or harsh to many. This was because, in public discourse, there was a strong tendency to interpret Bhadra 24 mainly as public anger, a political reaction, or a spontaneous uprising. But the structure, timing, targets, and spread of the events were giving different signals. My initial conclusion was that attacks on symbols of the state, residences of political leaders, security structures, courts, police posts, prisons, and private property in different parts of the country at the same time could not merely be the result of sudden public emotion.<\/p>\n

The report made public by the National Human Rights Commission after a long investigation has institutionally confirmed this central point. The Commission\u2019s report states that although the Bhadra 24 incident appeared to have begun because of individuals affected and angered by the events of Bhadra 23, its nature was \u201csimultaneous across the country with the same objective.\u201d The Commission concluded that these incidents were \u201ccriminal acts carried out in an organized manner according to a premeditated plan made in advance.\u201d<\/p>\n

This conclusion is not merely a similarity of wording; it is a serious confirmation of the perspective through which the nature of the event was understood. Just as my article published in Dragon Media viewed the violence, arson, and destruction of Bhadra 24 as organized activity hidden beneath the cover of spontaneity, the Commission also determined that \u201calmost all the incidents of that day should be viewed and addressed as criminal activities.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Commission\u2019s report mentions that on Bhadra 24, three police personnel died after being beaten, leaders and cadres as well as security personnel were subjected to deadly attacks, 21 people died in incidents of arson, many individuals were seriously injured, and property worth billions across the country was vandalized and set on fire. These facts further clarify the seriousness, scale, and criminal nature of the incident.<\/p>\n

This establishes one important point: the Bhadra 24 incident was not merely an emotional explosion. It was planned violence, targeted destruction, and an attack on state structures carried out in the name of a movement. It cannot be denied that on Bhadra 23, there was a foundation of civic discontent, restrictions on social media, concerns over freedom of expression, and anger against corruption. The Commission\u2019s preliminary monitoring report had also mentioned that the protesters raised issues of freedom of expression, the shutdown of social media, and anti-corruption concerns. But the structural destruction seen on Bhadra 24 shows that this civic discontent was diverted in another direction.<\/p>\n

This is precisely where it becomes necessary to distinguish between Bhadra 23 and Bhadra 24. In the events of Bhadra 23, the state\u2019s use of force, the role of security agencies, and the decision-making process of the then government are under question. Public reports have stated that the Commission recommended action against then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, then Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, and then Minister Prithvi Subba Gurung as violators of human rights. But in the events of Bhadra 24, another level of criminality is visible. Burning state structures, attacking courts and police offices, targeting the homes and private property of leaders, and attacking prisons and public property are matters that go beyond the limits of a democratic movement.<\/p>\n

This was the core warning of the article published in Dragon Media. The article argued that the burning of Parliament, Singha Durbar, Sheetal Niwas, the Supreme Court, police posts, and the homes of leaders was not only a crisis of governance, the constitution, and leadership, but also a sign of an attack on the very structure of the nation. After the Commission\u2019s report also recognized Bhadra 24 as organized criminal activity, this question no longer remains confined to ideological debate. It has become a matter of state investigation, judicial process, and national security assessment.<\/p>\n

However, caution is necessary here. The Commission\u2019s report states that the Bhadra 24 incident was an organized criminal act carried out with prior planning. But it does not literally confirm all the geopolitical conclusions or all claims related to external powers made in the article published by Dragon Media. The Commission\u2019s confirmation is mainly related to the organized, premeditated, and criminal nature of the incident. Therefore, responsible debate from now on must be based on facts, evidence, investigation, and accountability.<\/p>\n

Viewed from this perspective, the state now faces several unavoidable questions. If Bhadra 24 was an organized criminal act carried out with prior planning, where was the plan made? How were similar attacks possible across the country at the same time? Who coordinated them? Was there infiltration within the crowd or not? Why were the sensitive structures of the state left unsecured? Where did the security agencies fail? Why was the political leadership unable to act decisively in time? It is now the responsibility of the government to seek answers to these questions.<\/p>\n

This episode also carries a profound message for Nepali journalism. In moments of crisis, it is easy to follow the popular narrative, but it is the difficult yet necessary duty of journalism to read deeply the structure, signals, and balance of power behind events. The questions raised at that time have become even more serious after the Commission\u2019s report. This is not merely a matter of personal vindication; it is an example of fact-based analysis, courageous journalism, and truth confirmed by time.<\/p>\n

Now, the main question is not merely the interpretation of the report, but its implementation. If the Commission\u2019s conclusion is viewed through the lens of political gain and loss, the truth may again be pushed into the shadows. But if it is made the basis for state reform, security restructuring, the rule of law, justice for victims, and action against the guilty, Bhadra 24 can become a turning point of warning and reform in Nepal\u2019s democratic memory.<\/p>\n

The Bhadra 24 incident is a painful chapter for Nepali society. But the nation can move forward only by understanding that pain on the basis of truth, not by erasing it from history. The report of the National Human Rights Commission has given further legitimacy to the serious questions raised at the initial stage. The state must now address this truth not by half-accepting and half-concealing it, but through a full investigation, transparent justice, and institutional reform.<\/p>\n

The truth of Bhadra 24 is no longer merely a subject of debate. It has become a question of justice, accountability, and national security.<\/p>\n

(Author: Prem Sagar Poudel is a senior journalist and international relations analyst from Nepal. He has studied Nepal-China relations, the geopolitics of the Himalayan region, and Asian security issues in depth.)<\/em><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t