Nepal investigates deadly violence in pro-monarchy rally
KATHMANDU, March 29 (Reuters) - Nepal's government is investigating deadly violence that occurred during a rally by the supporters of the former king seeking the restoration of constitutional monarchy, a minister said on Saturday.
Two people were killed on Friday and at least 112 injured, including 77 security officials, authorities said, after police used force to stop the stone-throwing crowd from marching towards the parliament building in the capital Kathmandu.
Protesters vandalised homes, shops, a hospital, a political party office, vehicles and a shopping mall and snatched a weapon from the police, the authorities in the Himalayan nation said.
'This is sheer vandalism, arson, looting and anarchy. It cannot be a protest,' cabinet spokesman Prithvi Subba Gurung, the minister of communication and information technology, told Reuters.
Rishiram Tiwari, Kathmandu's chief district officer, said 105 protesters including some pro-monarchy leaders were taken into custody.
Nepal's 239-year-old monarchy was abolished in 2008 by a specially elected assembly as part of a deal with Maoist former rebels, ending an insurgency that killed 17,000 people between 1996 and 2006.
The last king, 77-year-old Gyanendra, lives as a commoner with his family in a private house in Kathmandu.
Political instability has rocked Nepal, one of the world's poorest countries, with 14 governments since the abolition of the monarchy, hampering economic growth and discouraging investment.
Public frustration has risen over the failure of successive governments to deliver on commitments to develop the economy of the country, a natural buffer between Asian giants China and India.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
EU could approve Mercosur deal by summer, agriculture chief says
BRUSSELS, June 5 (Reuters) - The European Union could approve its planned trade deal with South American bloc Mercosur before summer, but it has not yet fixed a date to do so, EU agriculture commissioner Christophe Hansen told Reuters on Thursday. "It could be before summer," Hansen said in an interview. EU nations still need to approve the deal, which was finalised in December but has faced opposition from members including France, which argues that the pact would hurt European farmers who face stricter norms and regulations than their South American peers. French President Emmanuel Macron and Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva discussed their differences on the pact at a meeting in Paris on Thursday. Macron said the text could be improved with the insertion of mirror clauses. France has previously argued for the insertion of an emergency break clause to restrict imports if a sudden surge in imports destabilises certain EU markets. "This would indeed require that we go back to the table and reopen. I don't think that this would be helpful in this situation," Hansen said of the idea of resuming negotiations with Mercosur countries to add new safeguards to the deal. "I see from many different parts of the agriculture and food sector, they are really looking for having these new opportunities," he added.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
ECB rate decision live: 'We are in a good position,' Lagarde says after cutting rates to 2%
Kylie is the Deputy Live Pages Editor, helping showcase Reuters multimedia coverage of the biggest global stories. She previously worked on the UK Breaking News team, and spent eight years in Westminster as a UK political correspondent - a period which included the Scottish independence referendum, Brexit and several general elections. She joined Reuters as a graduate trainee in 2008 and has also covered investment banking.
Reuters
4 hours ago
- Reuters
Supreme Court spares US gun companies from Mexico's lawsuit
WASHINGTON, June 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday spared two American gun companies from a lawsuit by Mexico's government accusing them of aiding illegal firearms trafficking to drug cartels and fueling gun violence in the southern neighbor of the United States. The justices in a 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court's ruling that had allowed the lawsuit to proceed against firearms maker Smith & Wesson (SWBI.O), opens new tab and distributor Interstate Arms. The lower court had found that Mexico plausibly alleged that the companies aided and abetted illegal gun sales, harming its government. The companies had argued for the dismissal of Mexico's suit, filed in Boston in 2021, under a 2005 U.S. law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that broadly shields gun companies from liability for crimes committed with their products. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided in 2024 that the alleged conduct by the companies fell outside these protections. "Mexico alleges that the companies aided and abetted unlawful sales routing guns to Mexican drug cartels. The question presented is whether Mexico's complaint plausibly pleads that conduct. We conclude it does not," liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court. The case came to the Supreme Court at a complicated time for U.S.-Mexican relations as President Donald Trump pursues on-again, off-again tariffs on Mexican goods. Trump has also accused Mexico of doing too little to stop the flow of synthetic drugs such as fentanyl and migrant arrivals at the border. Mexico's lawsuit, filed in Boston in 2021, accused the two companies of violating various U.S. and Mexican laws. Mexico claims that the companies have deliberately maintained a distribution system that included firearms dealers who knowingly sell weapons to third-party, or "straw," purchasers who then traffic guns to cartels in Mexico. The suit also accused the companies of unlawfully designing and marketing their guns as military-grade weapons to drive up demand among the cartels, including by associating their products with the American military and law enforcement. The gun companies said they make and sell lawful products. To avoid its lawsuit being dismissed under the 2005 law, Mexico was required to plausibly allege that the companies aided and abetted illegal gun sales and that such conduct was the "proximate cause" - a legal principle involving who is responsible for causing an injury - of the harms claimed by Mexico. Mexico in the lawsuit sought monetary damages of an unspecified amount and a court order requiring Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms to take steps to "abate and remedy the public nuisance they have created in Mexico." Gun violence fueled by trafficked U.S.-made firearms has contributed to a decline in business investment and economic activity in Mexico and forced its government to incur unusually high costs on services including healthcare, law enforcement and the military, according to the lawsuit. Mexico, a country with strict firearms laws, has said most of its gun homicides are committed with weapons trafficked from the United States and valued at more than $250 million annually. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on March 4.
