Why Municipal Police in Nepal Are Facing Public Criticism

Municipal police units across Nepal are increasingly facing criticism over the way they treat ordinary citizens, particularly low-income street vendors and informal workers struggling to survive in an economy marked by rising unemployment and deepening poverty.

The debate has intensified after several recent incidents involving municipal police from different local governments drew public outrage. From Surkhet to Butwal and Sunsari, questions are now being raised not only about the conduct of municipal police personnel, but also about the system that recruits and trains them.

Many of the incidents share a common pattern: aggressive enforcement, public humiliation and a visible lack of restraint while dealing with vulnerable citizens whose livelihoods often depend on selling small quantities of vegetables, fruits or seasonal produce in public spaces.

On Tuesday afternoon, another such incident surfaced from Birendranagar Municipality in Surkhet district, where municipal police were seen confronting vendors in the bus park area. The incident quickly reignited concerns that heavy-handed enforcement has become normalized within local governments.

The criticism is no longer limited to isolated cases. In recent months, municipal police in Butwal were widely condemned after entering marketplaces and confiscating goods from shopkeepers and street traders. Before that, an incident from Duhabi in Sunsari also drew strong reactions after municipal personnel were accused of using excessive force while clearing roadside structures.

For many observers, these are not standalone episodes. They are part of a growing culture of authority inside municipal policing that critics say lacks both accountability and human sensitivity.

Questions Over Training and Recruitment

Across Nepal’s 753 local levels, municipal police have become an increasingly visible force tasked with enforcing municipal bylaws, clearing streets, managing public spaces and carrying out mayoral directives. But concerns are mounting that the rapid expansion of these units has not been matched by proper institutional preparation.

Critics argue that many municipal police personnel are deployed without adequate understanding of constitutional rights, citizen protection, conflict de-escalation or humane public conduct.

The concern is not about enforcing rules alone. It is about how those rules are enforced.

Nepal’s Constitution guarantees citizens the right to dignity, equal protection under law and the right to live with respect. Human rights protections are not optional principles placed beneath administrative convenience. Even the Supreme Court, while interpreting law and constitutional disputes, repeatedly places human dignity at the center of justice.

That is precisely why the conduct of municipal police has become such a sensitive public issue.

Many citizens now question why individuals selling a few kilos of kafal near a bus park or farmers trying to sell vegetables grown in their own fields are being treated as security threats rather than struggling residents trying to survive.

Poverty, Unemployment and the Reality on the Streets

The criticism also reflects a deeper frustration with Nepal’s economic condition.

At a time when unemployment remains widespread and the country continues to grapple with economic instability, informal street trade has become one of the few survival options available to thousands of families. For many urban poor, selling fruits, vegetables or small household items on roadsides is not a business strategy — it is daily survival.

Critics say local governments have failed to understand that reality.

They argue that authorities cannot simply remove poor vendors from public spaces without first creating alternatives for employment, market access or rehabilitation. The state cannot demand perfect urban order while ignoring the economic desperation forcing citizens onto the streets in the first place.

This growing frustration is now increasingly directed at mayors and municipal leaderships who are accused of prioritizing visual urban management over the welfare of the very taxpayers funding those municipalities.

The Kathmandu Effect and Expanding Municipal Enforcement

Part of the current debate is also linked to the growing influence of Kathmandu Metropolitan City’s enforcement style under former Mayor Balen Shah.

Over the last three years, aggressive street-clearing operations carried out by Kathmandu’s municipal police frequently dominated public discourse. While many supporters praised the campaign as necessary urban discipline, critics warned that public approval of harsh enforcement risked encouraging similar behavior elsewhere in the country.

That concern now appears to be spreading beyond the capital.

Several local governments have begun adopting increasingly forceful enforcement tactics, while some municipal police personnel are accused of behaving as though they possess powers equivalent to Nepal Police without the same institutional accountability, training or professional standards.

Critics say this has created a dangerous culture where authority is performed through intimidation rather than public service.

Calls for Structural Reform

The growing backlash has now led to broader demands for reform.

Some argue that the municipal police system itself should be abolished if local governments cannot ensure professionalism and accountability. Others believe the institution can still function effectively, but only after major reforms in recruitment, training and oversight.

Among the key demands being raised are:

• Mandatory human rights and constitutional training for all municipal police personnel
• Strict behavioral standards while dealing with citizens
• Public service-oriented policing models instead of intimidation-based enforcement
• Psychological and communication training before deployment
• Clear accountability mechanisms for abuse of authority
• Reforms in recruitment processes to prioritize professionalism and civic responsibility

Critics also argue that municipal personnel should be repeatedly trained to understand a fundamental principle of policing: security forces exist to protect citizens, not dominate them.

Even Nepal Police’s own institutional principles emphasize citizen-friendly service, respectful communication and protection of human rights. Many now question why municipal police units across the country appear disconnected from those same values.

As frustration continues to grow, the debate around municipal policing is no longer just about street vendors or public space management. It has evolved into a wider national conversation about power, governance, dignity and the relationship between the state and ordinary citizens struggling to survive.