Why was Dan Bahadur Karki removed as police chief? Government has no clear answers

The government has removed Nepal Police Inspector General (IGP) Dan Bahadur Karki and appointed Manoj KC in his place

The government has removed Nepal Police Inspector General (IGP) Dan Bahadur Karki and appointed Manoj KC in his place. However, the government has not officially clarified why it was necessary to remove Karki, who was leading the country’s principal security organization, before the end of his tenure.

A Cabinet meeting held on Wednesday decided to appoint Karki as chief security adviser to Prime Minister Balen Shah. Additional Inspector General Manoj KC has been given charge of leading the police organization in his place.

The government created a new post of special security adviser at the IGP level at the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers and transferred Karki to that position.

This raises a serious question: If Karki was unable to discharge his responsibilities as police chief, what was the basis for appointing him as the prime minister’s security adviser? Conversely, if there was no serious concern about his performance, why was he removed from the leadership of the police organization?

Government spokesperson and Minister for Education and Sports Sasmit Pokharel said that Karki had not been punished and that only his responsibilities had been changed.

“This should not be viewed as disciplinary action. It is simply a reassignment of responsibilities. He has been appointed as a security adviser. There is now a new IGP, who will carry out the necessary duties,” Pokharel said.

However, he did not provide a concrete answer to the question of why Karki had to be removed as IGP.

Was Karki removed because his performance was unsatisfactory? Had he committed a serious mistake? Or was his leadership no longer acceptable because he repeatedly disagreed with the government? These are the questions the government must answer to the public.

The inspector general of police is an official who operates with the confidence of the government. However, the IGP is not merely an officer responsible for following the government's political directives. The IGP also heads an organization responsible for maintaining internal security, leading criminal investigations, and enforcing the law.

Therefore, removing the police chief is not simply a routine administrative decision by the government. It also concerns the institutional stability of the police organization, its professional independence, and the government's accountability.

The decision to remove Karki has also brought to the surface differences between Prime Minister Shah and Rabi Lamichhane, president of the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP).

The prime minister and the party president had reportedly disagreed sharply over removing Karki before the end of his tenure. Lamichhane was opposed to removing a serving IGP without sufficient publicly verifiable reasons.

A leader close to Lamichhane told Setopati that he had insisted Karki should not be removed without reasons that could be publicly defended and explained to the people.

According to the leader, Shah and Lamichhane had a lengthy discussion about the matter during their most recent meeting as well. During that discussion, Lamichhane maintained that the rationale for removing Karki had to be justified.

Despite Lamichhane's opposition, the government decided to remove Karki as IGP.

This raises the question of whether Karki's removal reflects a broader disagreement between the prime minister and the ruling party's president. The conflicting statements issued by the government and party spokespersons regarding the appointment of the new IGP also point in that direction.

While government spokesperson Pokharel claimed that the police leadership was changed in accordance with a party directive, RSP spokesperson Jagdish Kharel said that the party did not instruct the government to remove or appoint any particular individual.

“The secretariat meeting held on Saturday issued instructions to investigate and take action over the police entering media offices and arresting journalists. However, it did not instruct the government to remove or dismiss anyone from their position,” Kharel told Setopati.

He added: “The government has not said that today's decision was made because the party called for action over the arrest of journalists. It has simply said that responsibilities have been reassigned. The government will probably clarify why it made such a decision. However, this was not a directive from the party.”

The prime minister's decision to proceed with such a sensitive change in the leadership of the country's principal security organization despite the ruling party president's opposition has raised further questions about the relationship between the two leaders and the government's decision-making process.

Disagreements had existed between PM Shah's government and Karki for some time. Reports had previously emerged of differences between the government and the police leadership over the arrests of prominent political figures, police deployment for investigations, and transfers o