Nepal: Death toll at least 14 as police clash with protestors, Army deployed

Kathmandu is reeling after at least 14 people were killed and more than 40 injured on Monday, as protests against the government’s sudden decision to ban major social media platforms descended into violent clashes. The unrest, spearheaded by young Nepalis under the self-styled banner of 'Gen Z', has triggered a political crisis that now risks destabilising Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s administration.

The government banned 26 platforms — including Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, X and YouTube — last Thursday, arguing that companies had failed to register with the ministry of communication and information technology as required. Ministers framed the move as regulatory housekeeping.

Yet on the streets, the ban has been interpreted as a frontal assault on free speech and civic space. The perception of creeping censorship has galvanised Nepal’s youth, many of them school and university students, into one of the most sustained protest movements the capital has seen in years.

On Monday, thousands converged outside Parliament, chanting anti-government slogans and demanding the immediate revocation of the ban. When a section of demonstrators forced their way into the Parliament complex, police responded with batons, tear gas and rubber bullets.

Witnesses described scenes of chaos as wounded protesters were carried to nearby hospitals. According to reports in The Himalayan Times and Kantipur, at least 14 deaths were confirmed across multiple medical facilities, though the authorities have not yet provided official casualty figures.

The security forces’ response has been uncompromising. The Nepal Army was deployed to key sites in Kathmandu by late afternoon, while the district administration imposed curfews and prohibitory orders across swathes of the capital. “No movement of people, demonstration, meeting, gathering or sit-in will be allowed in the restricted zone,” said chief district officer Chhabi Lal Rijal.

The restrictions have since been extended to the vicinity of Rastrapati Bhawan, the vice-president’s residence and the prime minister’s office.

But rather than containing the unrest, the crackdown risks fuelling it. Protests have already spread to other cities, and hospitals in the capital are struggling to cope with the injured. Civil Hospital and Trauma Centre have reportedly been forced to refer patients to other facilities as casualty numbers mount.

The Oli government is attempting to frame the crisis as a question of law and order. “We will always oppose anomalies and arrogance, and would never accept any act that undermines the nation,” the prime minister declared on Sunday. Insisting that the ruling party was not “against social media”, Oli argued that businesses profiting in Nepal must comply with domestic law. He dismissed the protests as the work of “puppets who only oppose for the sake of opposing”.

That narrative, however, is running up against a very different perception on the ground. The Computer Association of Nepal (CAN), representing technology stakeholders, warned that blocking major platforms would devastate education, commerce and communication. “This move of the government also poses the risk of Nepal falling behind the world digitally,” said CAN president Sunaina Ghimire, urging dialogue over blanket bans.

Journalists have also taken to the streets, staging their own demonstration in central Kathmandu to denounce what they see as a direct assault on press freedom. Their protest underscores the breadth of opposition beyond the student-led rallies.

The youth-driven mobilisation has also tapped into deeper resentments. A viral social media trend dubbed 'Nepo Kid' has become a rallying cry, accusing the children of politicians and elites of enjoying privileges secured through corruption.

Though the platforms that carried the trend are now banned, the sentiment has spilled into the streets, intertwining frustration with inequality and governance failures with anger at censorship.

The unrest reflects a generational clash. For many young Nepalis, social media is not only a tool of entertainment but the primary forum for communication, education, activism and economic opportunity. The ban, implemented without wide consultation, is therefore read not as administrative tidying but as an existential affront to their autonomy.

The government now faces a perilous dilemma. To rescind the ban would be to admit miscalculation and embolden the protests. To hold the line risks further escalation of violence, international criticism and reputational damage to Nepal’s fragile democracy. The army’s deployment signals the seriousness with which authorities view the threat, but military boots on the streets of Kathmandu also evoke troubling memories of past crackdowns.

For Oli, the stakes could hardly be higher. He has already been accused of authoritarian tendencies during previous stints in office. Now, with bodies piling up in hospitals and curfews in the capital, his government is in danger of being defined by a confrontation with its youngest citizens — the very demographic that represents Nepal’s future.

What began as a regulatory dispute has become a crucible for broader questions: about free expression, about corruption and privilege, about whether Nepal’s fragile democratic institutions can withstand the strain of heavy-handed governance.