CCPR/C/120/D/2170/2012
1.
The authors of the communication are Shanta Neupane and Nisha Neupane, born on
27 June 1955 and 13 April 1980, respectively. They claim that the State party has violated
the rights of their missing husband and father, Danda Pani Neupane, a national of Nepal
born on 26 March 1946, under articles 6, 7, 9, 10 and 16, read alone and in conjunction
with 2 (3), of the Covenant, as well as their own rights under article 7, read in conjunction
with 2 (3), of the Covenant. The Covenant and its Optional Protocol entered into force for
Nepal on 14 August 1991. The authors are represented by counsel.
The facts as submitted by the authors
2.1
In 1996, a 10-year internal armed conflict between the Government of Nepal and the
Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist began and the human rights situation deteriorated. The
number of human rights violations, including arbitrary arrest and detention, torture,
summary execution and enforced disappearance, increased significantly. A great number of
disappearances occurred between 1998 and 2004 in the context of counter-insurgency
operations launched by the security forces against members and supporters of the
Communist Party.1 The victims were students, businessmen, workers, farmers, journalists
and human rights defenders, among others.
2.2
Danda Pani Neupane and Shanta Neupane had three children, including Nisha
Neupane. Mr. Neupane had been an active member of the Communist Party since 1985. At
the time of his arrest, he was a member of its Central Committee and the head of its
publication division. At the beginning of the armed conflict, Mr. Neupane went into hiding.
Two years before his arrest and subsequent enforced disappearance, he moved from
Gitanagar village development committee, Chitwan district, to Kalanki ward No. 4 in
Kathmandu. Mrs. Neupane stayed in Gitanagar with her parents-in-law and her two
daughters.
2.3
On 21 May 1999, at approximately 5.30 p.m., Mr. Neupane was stopped by four
uniformed policemen in Sundhara, near Tebahal, Kathmandu. After asking his name, they
reportedly put him into a van with five or six other uniformed policemen and drove him to
an unknown destination. S.A., a Communist Party cadre, was with Mr. Neupane at the time
of his arrest. She informed B.G., a local Communist Party cadre, and he later informed Mrs.
Neupane.
2.4
On 25 May 1999, Mrs. Neupane began searching for her husband. She visited the
District Police Office in Hannumandhoka, Kathmandu, where she was informed that her
husband had never been held in police custody. Between 26 and 30 May, Mrs. Neupane
visited the three main detention centres in Kathmandu — the Central Jail, Nakhu Jail and
Charkhal Jail — where she was also informed that Mr. Neupane had never been detained in
those places.
2.5
On 26 May 1999, Mrs. Neupane filed for a writ of habeas corpus with the Supreme
Court. The Court issued a show cause order to the District Police Office, which responded
that it had not arrested Mr. Neupane. However, S.A. and M.P. testified before the Court that
they had witnessed Mr. Neupane being arrested by the police. On 12 July, the Court
quashed the habeas corpus petition, arguing that the author could not demonstrate that her
husband was detained and did not indicate the location where he was being held.
2.6
Reportedly, in June 1999, Mr. A., a policeman from Gitanagar who was temporarily
based at the Nepal police training centre in Maharajgunj, Kathmandu, saw Mr. Neupane
being held in police custody at the training centre and informed Mr. D., his neighbour in
Gitanagar. Mr. D. knew Mr. Neupane personally, since he had gone to school with Nisha
Neupane, to whom Mr. D. passed on this information. Afterward, Shanta Neupane met Mr.
A. in Kathmandu and showed him three photographs of Mr. Neupane. Mr. A. confirmed
that he had seen him being escorted to the toilet on several occasions, handcuffed and
blindfolded. Mrs. Neupane asked Mr. A. to provide a written statement with this
information. However, Mr. A. was transferred to the western region of Nepal and Mrs.
Neupane was unable to contact him again.
1
2
The authors refer to the report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances on
its visit to Nepal (E/CN.4/2005/65/Add.1).