House panel seeks police, immigration records on ambassador nominee

Nepal’s Parliament’s Hearing Committee decided to investigate complaints against Giri Bahadur Sunar, who has been proposed as ambassador to Saudi Arabia. The committee treated the allegations seriously and sought official records before proceeding with its review. This matters because the complaints concern his past conduct and could affect consideration of his nomination.

After meeting the individuals who filed complaints, the committee asked the Department of Immigration to verify an alleged deportation from Germany. It also asked the Lalitpur District Police Range for information about a sexual-violence complaint. The police were asked what action was taken and whether the case ended through a formal agreement at the police office.

The committee’s decision does not establish that the allegations are true. It shows that lawmakers want evidence from government agencies before assessing the nominee. The requested records could clarify what happened in Germany and how the police handled the complaint. The article does not state the committee’s final decision on Sunar’s nomination.

Two allegations drove the committee’s request for records. One complaint alleges that Giri Bahadur Sunar was deported from Germany. Another alleges sexual violence by Sunar against an individual. The committee considered the complaints serious enough to require verification by government authorities rather than relying only on the submissions.

The Department of Immigration was asked to check whether the alleged deportation occurred. Lalitpur police were asked for details about the sexual-violence complaint, including what action officials took. The committee also wants to establish whether the matter was settled through a formal agreement at the police office. These requests seek documentary details about both the alleged conduct and the official response.

The article reports allegations, not proven findings. It does not say whether Germany deported Sunar, whether the sexual-violence allegation was substantiated, or whether police improperly handled the case. The committee’s next assessment depends partly on the records it receives from immigration officials and police.

The committee is seeking information from two government bodies because the complaints involve different kinds of records. The Department of Immigration can address Sunar’s alleged immigration history. The Lalitpur District Police Range can provide information about a complaint filed in Nepal. Together, the records may help lawmakers assess the allegations and the handling of the case.

Immigration officials were asked to verify whether Sunar was deported from Germany, as claimed in one complaint. Lalitpur police were asked for details about a complaint alleging sexual violence by Sunar. The committee also wants to know what action police took and whether the matter was settled through a formal agreement at the police office.

The article does not report the agencies’ answers. It also does not say whether either allegation has been proven. For now, the committee is gathering official information after meeting the complainants. Those records will give it a documented basis for its continuing consideration of Sunar’s nomination.

The committee’s Monday schedule included hearings for four nominees besides Giri Bahadur Sunar. This indicates that the committee was handling several ambassadorial nominations at the same time, while separately seeking records about complaints against Sunar. The four nominees were listed in the committee’s agenda.

The nominees were Nishchal Nath Pandey, proposed ambassador to India; Kalyan Raj Sharma, proposed ambassador to China; Chiran Jung Thapa, proposed ambassador to the United States; and Gaurav Shumsher Rana, proposed ambassador to the United Kingdom. Their hearings were scheduled for the same day as the committee’s work concerning Sunar.

The article gives no details about complaints, questions, or outcomes involving the four other nominees. It only identifies their names, proposed destinations, and scheduled hearings. The committee’s specific decision about Sunar remained connected to the immigration and police information it requested after meeting his complainants.

Official records confirming serious misconduct could damage Sunar’s nomination because the committee is reviewing his suitability for ambassador. Evidence that a complaint was mishandled could also raise concerns about accountability and credibility. However, the article does not state an automatic consequence or identify a final procedure the committee would follow.

The committee asked immigration officials to verify the alleged deportation from Germany. It asked Lalitpur police to explain their response to a sexual-violence complaint and whether the matter was settled through a formal agreement. If those records support the complaints, lawmakers would have documented information to consider alongside the complainants’ accounts.

Based on general parliamentary nomination practice, possible consequences could include delaying consideration, requesting further investigation, or rejecting the nomination. This is general context, not an outcome reported in the article. The current reality is that the committee had only requested information, and no final decision about Sunar was reported.

Deportation is the official removal of a person from a country, usually under an immigration or legal decision. It differs from voluntarily leaving because the person is required to depart. The article reports only an allegation that Sunar was deported from Germany; it does not explain the alleged reason or confirm that the event happened.

The committee asked Nepal’s Department of Immigration to verify the claim. That request creates a clear mechanism for checking the allegation against official records rather than treating the complaint as established fact. The committee is also examining a separate sexual-violence complaint through Lalitpur police records, showing that it is reviewing both conduct allegations and official responses.

A confirmed deportation might matter in evaluating an ambassadorial nominee because governments generally consider whether a representative’s past creates credibility or diplomatic concerns. Its significance would depend on the facts and reason for removal. The article does not say what Germany’s records show or how the committee would weigh them.

An ambassador is a senior official appointed to represent one country in another country. The ambassador communicates with the host government and represents the sending country’s interests. In this case, Giri Bahadur Sunar was proposed as Nepal’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia, so the nomination concerns Nepal’s representation abroad.

Screening allows lawmakers and governments to review a nominee before appointment. The Hearing Committee is doing that by meeting people who filed complaints and requesting records from the Department of Immigration and Lalitpur District Police Range. It wants to verify an alleged deportation from Germany and understand how police handled a sexual-violence complaint.

Careful screening can identify information that may affect a nominee’s credibility and suitability. It can also test whether allegations are supported by official records rather than assumptions. The article shows that Sunar’s review is still underway. It does not report whether he will ultimately be approved, rejected, or replaced.