The Nepali Congress on Wednesday warned the government to end what it called a “rule of fear and confusion,” accusing it of acting arbitrarily and becoming authoritarian. In a statement issued on Wednesday, General Secretary Pradeep Paudel said the opposition party would resist alleged misuse of state machinery, efforts to suppress its voice and propaganda directed against the party. Senior Vice President Bishwa Prakash Sharma made similar remarks at a press conference after an emergency meeting of party office-bearers at the Congress office in Sanepa.
Congress pledges political and legal resistance
Paudel’s statement framed the party’s response as a challenge to what it described as government pressure on the opposition. He said the Congress would use both political and legal means to oppose the conduct it had identified. The statement did not present this as a single-issue dispute: it linked the party’s concerns to the use of state institutions, the space available for opposition voices and what it called propaganda against the Congress.
The party’s warning was directed at the government’s overall approach. By demanding an immediate end to the “rule of fear and confusion,” the Congress signalled that it regarded the situation as serious and was calling for a change in conduct, rather than limiting its response to criticism of an individual decision. Its statement placed the burden on the government to address the allegations and stop actions the party considers a misuse of authority.
The party also made clear that its response would have both political and legal dimensions. Paudel’s remarks indicate that the Congress intends to challenge the alleged conduct through public and political opposition as well as legal channels. The statement, however, did not specify particular legal proceedings or identify a timetable for such action.
‘Inam Sapkota case’ raised by the party
The Congress also brought up what it called the “Inam Sapkota case,” alleging involvement by the Prime Minister’s Office and high-ranking officials. The allegation was part of the party’s wider criticism of the government and its use of authority. The statement and remarks described in reports attribute the claim to the Congress; they do not establish that the alleged involvement has been proven.
The party’s reference to the case gives a specific focus to its broader warning about state machinery. By raising the alleged role of the Prime Minister’s Office and senior officials, the Congress is calling attention to what it says is a matter requiring scrutiny. The information provided by the party does not set out further details of the case, the officials concerned or the evidence behind the allegation, so those claims remain attributed to the Congress.
Sharma echoes party’s warning
Sharma reiterated the party’s concerns at a press conference following an emergency meeting of office-bearers at the party’s Sanepa office. His remarks were similar to Paudel’s statement, reinforcing the party’s position that it would resist alleged attempts to curb opposition activity and use state institutions against political opponents.
The public statement and the subsequent press conference presented a common message from the party’s leadership: the government should end the conduct the Congress describes as fear and confusion, while the party will oppose alleged abuses through political and legal channels. The Congress’s account centres on claims of authoritarianism, pressure on the opposition and the “Inam Sapkota case.” The government’s response to these allegations was not included in the reports cited here.
