CCPR/C/126/D/2560/2015
at Maharajgunj prison and that he was still alive. On 21 October 2003, Tikanath Kandel
enquired about his sons’ whereabouts with Thakur Prasad Kandel, a distant relative who
was then the Minister for Land Reform and Management, who told him that both sons were
still alive and would be released soon. In November 2003, Tikanath Kandel sent a letter of
appeal to the office of the Prime Minister and to the Ministry of Home Affairs requesting
protection for his two sons, but he never received a reply.
2.7
On 10 December 2003, Ramhari Kandel was released. He was also threatened,
however, by soldiers who told him that he would be rearrested or killed if he initiated any
legal action regarding his or his brother’s detention. Ramhari Kandel did not dare to do so.
He went back to his village in Dhading District. Neither Ramhari Kandel nor any other
member of his family have ever seen Amrit Kandel again, whose fate and whereabouts
remain unknown.
2.8
Tikanath Kandel joined a society of families of the disappeared in 2004, with a view
to participate in advocacy and in protests aimed at pressuring the Government into
disclosing the fate and whereabouts of several victims of enforced disappearance.
2.9
On 30 November 2004, Tikanath Kandel lodged an application for habeas corpus
with the Supreme Court of Nepal with the assistance of the Nepal Bar Association. The
application mentioned, as respondents, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of
Defence, the District Police Office of Kathmandu, the District Administration Office of
Kathmandu, the Headquarters of the Royal Nepalese Army and the Bhairabanath Battalion
of the Army in Maharajgunj. In December 2004, these entities all denied involvement in the
arrest and detention of Amrit Kandel. On 20 December 2004, Ramhari Kandel submitted
his testimony to the Supreme Court. On 16 March 2005, the Court ordered the newly
established Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons to provide
information on whether Amrit Kandel’s name was on its list of disappeared individuals. On
30 March 2005, the Court also ordered the National Human Rights Commission to provide
information on the measures it had taken with regard to the authors’ complaint. However,
before being provided with the requested information, the Court decided, on 13 July 2005,
to dismiss the application for procedural reasons since the counsel in the case had not come
to one of the hearings. Tikanath Kandel only learned about this development in January
2006.
2.10 On 13 February 2006, Amrit Kandel’s case was included in a habeas corpus writ
filed with the Supreme Court on behalf of 34 disappeared persons. On 1 June 2007, the
Supreme Court issued a judgment ordering the Government to establish a high-level
investigative commission charged with making public information on the status of the
disappeared persons, criminalizing enforced disappearance, initiating legal action against
the persons responsible and providing reparation to affected families. However, the
Supreme Court judgment was never implemented by the Nepalese authorities.
2.11 The authors last heard of Amrit Kandel being alive in April 2006, when another
retired Royal Nepalese Army soldier from their district indicated that he was being detained
in the Army barracks in Baireni and that he had personally seen him there. Tikanath Kandel
immediately went to Baireni but was denied entry to the barracks. He informed the National
Human Rights Commission, which sent a team there on 24 May 2006; its members too
were denied access. On 26 May 2006, the team was finally allowed into the barracks, but
Amrit Kandel was not there.
2.12 In November 2008, in his capacity as coordinator of the society of families of the
disappeared, Tikanath Kandel wrote letters to the Prime Minister and the Minister for
Home Affairs requesting them to disclose information on the fate and whereabouts of
several disappeared persons, including his son. He also met with the Minister for Defence.
He never received any information. To date, the database on missing persons of the
International Committee of the Red Cross shows that Amrit Kandel’s fate and whereabouts
remain unknown.
2.13 Following the establishment of the Interim Relief Programme by the Ministry of
Peace and Reconstruction, the authors applied to obtain monetary compensation. In
November 2009, they were awarded 100,000 Nepalese rupees (approximately 1,000 United
3