Kathmnandu: Below we reproduce the third part of the Country report released by the US Department of State on the conditions of Human Rights in Nepal last February. The release issued by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. This part deals with the patterns of arbitrary arrests, detention and the likes practiced in Nepal-Chief editor

“The Constitution stipulates that the authorities must arraign or release a suspect within 24 hours of arrest, but the police often violate this provision. Under the Public Offenses Act of 1970, the police must obtain warrants for an arrest unless a person is caught in the act of committing a crime. For many offenses, the case must be filed in court within 7 days of arrest. If the court upholds the detention, the law authorizes the police to hold the suspect for 25 days to complete their investigation, with a possible extension of 7 days. However, the police often hold prisoners longer. The Supreme Court on occasion has ordered the release of detainees held longer than 24 hours without a court appearance. Amnesty International reported that on November 30, 1998, Bhanu Sharma, a pharmacist, was approached by police at his home in Dang district; the police requested medicine. On the way to his shop, the police forced Sharma into a van and took him to the district police office. On January 5, Sharma reportedly was transferred to a police-training center in Kathmandu. On January 13, a writ of habeas corpus was filed in the Supreme Court, and Sharma was released on February 7.

Detainees do not have the legal right to receive visits by family members, and they are permitted access to lawyers only after the authorities file charges. In practice the police grant access to prisoners on a basis that varies from prison to prison. Persons have a right to legal representation and a court appointed lawyer, but government lawyers or access to private attorneys is provided only on request. Consequently, those unaware of their rights may not have legal representation. There is a system of bail, but bonds are too expensive for most citizens. According to the Department of Prisons, over half of the 6,000 persons imprisoned are awaiting trial. Due to court backlogs, a slow appeals process, and poor access to legal representation, pretrial detention often exceeds the period to which persons subsequently are sentenced after a trial and conviction.

Under the Public Security Act, the authorities may detain persons who allegedly threaten domestic security and tranquillity, amicable relations with other states, and relations between citizens of different classes or religions. Persons whom the Government detains under the act are considered to be in preventive detention and can be held for up to 6 months without being charged with a crime. Human rights groups allege that the police have used arbitrary arrest and detention during the “People’s War” to intimidate communities considered sympathetic to the Maoists (see Section 1.b.). Since the insurgents began their terrorist campaigns, 5,178 Maoist-related arrests had been made through December. Of those arrested 1,518 had been charged with crimes and were awaiting trial. The remainder had been released.

The 1991 amendments to the Public Security Act allow the authorities to extend periods of detention after submitting written notices to the Home Ministry. The police must notify the district court of the detention within 24 hours, and it may order an additional 6 months of detention before authorities file official charges. In 1997 the police asked the Government to enact legislation that would extend the maximum time of detention under The 1991 amendments to the Public Security Act allow the authorities to extend periods of detention after submitting written notices to the Home Ministry. The police must notify the district court of the detention within 24 hours, and it may order an additional 6 months of detention before authorities file official charges. In 1997 the police asked the Government to enact legislation that would extend the maximum time of detention under ts. The act authorizes the CDO to order detentions, to issue search warrants, and to specify fines and other punishments for misdemeanors without judicial review. Few recent instances of the use of the Public Offenses Act have come to light, since it has become more common, particularly with the Maoists, to arrest persons under the Public Security Act.

Under the Public Offenses Act hundreds of persons were arrested on March 18, 1996 for staging a peaceful protest of the human rights situation in China organized by Amnesty International in Kathmandu. Although most were released the same day, several AI officers and 14 Tibetans were held in jail for up to 7 days, some without being charged. Amnesty International reported that many persons interviewed by AI investigators after the May 1998 sweeps against the UPF reported one or more of the following: That they were detained without having been given arrest warrants at the time of the arrest; that they were not presented before a judicial authority within 24 hours, as required under the Constitution; that they were held for periods longer than the 25 days allowed under the Public Offenses Act; that they were not told of the charges against them; and that they were denied access to an attorney, at least during the initial period of their detention. Authorities detained journalists and their advocates on occasion, on suspicion of having ties to or sympathy for the Maoists. The Constitution prohibits exile; it is not used. ( Text courtesy: USIA, Kathmandu).