A complaint has been filed with Nepal’s Parliamentary Hearing Committee against Jigyan Kumar Thapa, the proposed Nepali ambassador to Japan, seeking to halt his appointment process until allegations about his residency status and assets are investigated. Arun Parajuli, a Nepali residing in Japan, registered the complaint by email, alleging that Thapa holds permanent residency (PR) and property in Japan. The complaint also raises questions about Thapa’s closeness to the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and asks the committee to examine the claims before approving his nomination.
Complaint calls for investigation before approval
The complaint asks the Parliamentary Hearing Committee not to approve Thapa’s name until it has looked into his alleged PR status and assets in Japan. Its central argument is that the claims should be examined as part of the appointment process, rather than left unresolved when a decision is made on the proposed ambassador.
Parajuli submitted the complaint by email. He is identified as a Nepali living in Japan, where the alleged permanent residency and property are said to be held. The complaint makes allegations about Thapa’s status and assets; it does not, by itself, establish that he has PR or owns property in Japan. The committee is being asked to investigate those claims before the appointment proceeds.
The request to halt the process is therefore tied to the timing of that inquiry. The complainant wants the questions addressed before the committee approves the proposed appointment. No finding on the allegations is described in the information provided, and the claims should be distinguished from a verified determination about Thapa’s residency or financial interests.
Allegations include political proximity
Alongside the claims about PR and property, the complaint cites Thapa’s alleged closeness to the Rastriya Swatantra Party. It calls for scrutiny of that relationship as well as an investigation into his status and assets in Japan. The complaint thus raises both personal and political concerns in asking the committee to withhold approval.
The information available does not provide further details about the alleged relationship with the RSP or identify specific actions that would demonstrate closeness. It also does not set out particulars about the property alleged to be in Japan. These are matters raised by the complainant, rather than conclusions confirmed in the complaint’s registration.
For now, the issue before the committee, as framed by the complaint, is whether the allegations should be examined before it considers approval of Thapa’s nomination. The request does not amount to a finding that the proposed ambassador is ineligible or that the claims are proven. Establishing the facts would require scrutiny of the matters identified in the complaint.
Appointment process faces questions
The complaint places the proposed appointment under scrutiny by asking the Parliamentary Hearing Committee to investigate before proceeding with approval. Its demand is specific: examine Thapa’s alleged permanent residency and assets in Japan, and consider the concerns raised about his political proximity, before deciding whether to approve his name.
The case therefore turns on allegations that remain to be assessed. The complaint itself records Parajuli’s request for an investigation; it does not establish the outcome of any inquiry or indicate that the committee has accepted the claims. Until the matters are examined, the allegations should not be treated as confirmed facts.
The immediate question is whether the committee will investigate the claims before taking up approval of Thapa’s proposed appointment. The complaint seeks to make that examination a condition of moving forward, but the information provided does not state what steps the committee has taken or what decision it will make. It also does not provide a response from Thapa or an official finding on the allegations.
