Why did the govt backtrack on plans to re-arrest Rabi? Fear of public backlash
Lamichhane's release, granted under the condition of ensuring his presence in Kathmandu, indicates the state's reluctance to escalate measures further.
KATHMANDU: The district court ordered the release of Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) President Rabi Lamichhane on bail, but the police’s plan to arrest him again failed on Thursday evening.
Lamichhane’s release, granted under the condition of ensuring his presence in Kathmandu, indicates the state’s reluctance to escalate measures further.
Charges Against Lamichhane
Lamichhane faced allegations of cooperative fraud, organized crime, and money laundering. In Kaski, a case involving cooperative fraud and money laundering estimated at Rs 278.9 million was filed against him. However, in Kathmandu, he was charged only with cooperative fraud and organized crime.
Government’s Shift in Strategy
The government appeared to step back from aggressive measures, especially considering the grave accusations filed in Kaski. Sources suggest concerns about potential public backlash influenced this decision. A police official stated, “Following complaints of excessive repression, we have acted under orders to ease the approach.”
The lack of solid evidence and procedural gaps has weakened the government’s position.
Former Attorney General Raman Shrestha noted, “Cases were filed without evidence. This has embarrassed the government and hindered further action.”
Accusations of Political Retaliation
Many view the charges against Lamichhane as politically motivated.
A parliamentary committee earlier stated Lamichhane had no direct involvement in transferring cooperative funds to Gorkha Media, despite being its operator. However, police investigations focused on him due to his position in the media company.
While investigations continue across five districts, Kaski remains the sole location for the money laundering charge.
Public Reactions and Legal Challenges
After 90 days of investigation and 18 days in detention, authorities failed to produce compelling evidence against Lamichhane, drawing criticism.
The court’s refusal to permit further custody after his release on bail has limited the government’s ability to exert additional pressure.
This case has raised serious questions about the government and police administration’s actions.
The legal battle ahead will determine the trajectory of this controversy, with its resolution now left to time and the courts.
