Why Sobita Gautam Says Nepal Cannot Introduce the Death Penalty Despite Public Demands

KATHMANDU, AUGUST 23, 2026

Public Demands Meet a Legal Barrier

Law Minister Sobita Gautam has said Nepal cannot introduce the death penalty under its current legal framework, despite growing public demands for harsher punishment following the rape and killing of three-year-old Garima Chaudhary in Bara. The issue was discussed in Kathmandu on Saturday, August 22, when Gautam, Home Minister Sudan Gurung, other government representatives and Garima’s parents held talks over justice for the child, with the government explaining that Article 16(2) of Nepal’s Constitution prohibits capital punishment and the country also has international commitments against the death penalty. The talks eventually resulted in a three-point agreementbetween the government and Garima’s family.

Why Can't Nepal Simply Introduce the Death Penalty?

The biggest legal obstacle comes directly from the Constitution of Nepal.

Article 16 guarantees the right to live with dignity, while Article 16(2) states that no law can be made providing the death penalty to anyone. In simple terms, the government cannot pass an ordinary law introducing capital punishment while this constitutional provision remains in place.

Gautam has stressed that strong public anger cannot allow the government to act outside the Constitution, even when demands for the harshest possible punishment are widespread.

International Commitments Create Another Barrier

Nepal's legal restriction does not end with its Constitution.

The country is also a party to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), an international agreement specifically aimed at abolishing capital punishment.

Nepal joined the protocol in 1998, meaning any attempt to restore the death penalty would also raise serious questions regarding the country's existing international legal commitments.

Garima Case Brings the Debate Back

The debate over capital punishment has intensified following the rape and killing of three-year-old Garima Chaudhary in Bara.

The case sparked demonstrations and widespread public anger, with some protesters demanding the death penalty for people convicted of rape and murder. The outrage also increased pressure on the government to reconsider whether Nepal's existing punishments for heinous crimes are strong enough.

Sudan Gurung Holds Talks With Garima's Family

As demands for justice continued, Home Minister Sudan Gurung met Garima's parents at the Ministry of Home Affairs, alongside Law Minister Sobita Gautam and other government representatives.

The discussions continued for hours before the two sides reached a three-point agreement, shifting the government's immediate response toward reviewing existing laws and addressing the family's demands rather than promising capital punishment.

First Point: Punishment Laws to Be Reviewed

One of the most significant commitments is a formal review of Nepal's laws dealing with heinous crimes and their punishments.

Under the agreement, the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs is to establish a seven-member Garima Justice Resolution Committee.

The committee has been given seven days to study the existing legal provisions and recommend possible reforms. This could include examining whether punishments for serious crimes need to be strengthened within Nepal's constitutional framework.

Second Point: Memorial for Garima

The agreement also includes an initiative to construct a memorial statue in Garima's memory.

Relevant government bodies are expected to coordinate with local authorities to move the proposal forward, creating a permanent memorial for the three-year-old whose death has triggered nationwide calls for justice.

Third Point: Family to Perform Final Rites

The third part of the agreement concerns Garima's final rites.

The government agreed that her parents would be able to conduct the funeral and related rituals according to their customs and traditions following the understanding reached with authorities.

Stronger Punishments Can Still Be Considered

The constitutional ban on capital punishment does not mean Nepal is unable to strengthen its criminal laws.

The government can still examine tougher prison sentences, changes to sentencing provisions, stronger investigation and prosecution mechanisms, better protection for victims and other reforms that remain within constitutional limits.

The newly announced committee is therefore expected to focus on what Nepal can legally change, rather than simply responding to demands for a punishment that existing law prohibits.

Investigation and Justice Must Follow the Law

Gautam has also emphasized the importance of a fair and evidence-based investigation, particularly when cases generate intense anger on social media and in public demonstrations.

Public pressure can push authorities to act quickly and demand accountability, but determining guilt and punishment must ultimately follow evidence, investigation and the judicial process.

What Happens Next?

Attention now turns to the seven-member committee and its seven-day deadline.

The Garima case has opened a much wider national discussion about whether Nepal's laws are strong enough to deal with rape and other heinous crimes. While the government says the death penalty is blocked by the current constitutional and international legal framework, the three-point agreement with Garima's family means possible reforms to other punishments are now set to undergo formal review.