With the government moving forward with the bill regarding Nepal Police and Armed Police Force (APF), there has been disagreement between the two organizations. The Nepal Police is dissatisfied with the attempt to introduce the armed forces into the rights related to crime investigation and peace and security management. On the other hand, the Armed Police objected that the Nepal Police had an "unnatural interest" in the laws of other agencies rather than ensuring their own rights.

After 7 years of the transition of the country to a federal structure, the government has taken two bills related to Nepal Police and Armed Police Force (APF) to the Federal Parliament. 52 amendments have been proposed by MPs in the Nepal Police Bill. On the Armed Police Bill, 72 hours have been given for amendments after the general discussion in the House of Representatives only on Monday. After that, both bills will be sent to the State Order and Good Governance Committee for quarterly discussion with amendment proposals. 

The Police Act is about to be amended after seven decades and the Armed Police Act after two and a half decades. The Police Act was promulgated on 31 October 2012. The Armed Police was established by bringing an ordinance on 9 January 2057. Later, the Armed Police Act was issued on 6 August 2058. Former and current security officers are raising questions saying that the law that is going to be amended after a long time, instead of strengthening the police organization, has given discretionary powers to 'employees', 'ministers' and 'cabinet'. 

The Armed Police Bill is going to institutionalize responsibilities such as cross-border crime, organized crime, counter-terrorism, crime prevention and control such as drug dealing, infiltration of foreign nationals, international airport security, which Nepal Police is dissatisfied with. A police official said that the armed police, established as a paramilitary force, have been brought into regular work of crime prevention and control and investigation. The Nepal Police is also dissatisfied with the fact that they have been given powers up to 'sutra pachilan' and arresting those involved in crimes and conducting preliminary inquiries/investigations.

Former Inspector General of Police Prakash Aryal argues that if both the police bills are passed, conflicts will arise between the two security agencies and it will not benefit the country. "The law should make it clear that the Armed Police is intended to be an alternative force to the Nepal Police, that the Armed Police is a paramilitary body," he said. The nature of work should be clarified and freed from duplicity.

Former Inspector General of Police Aryal said that there is a need to amend the provision made in the bill to involve the armed forces in the investigation as well. In the criminal justice system, the Nepal Police is the leading agency for investigation and law enforcement. It is not a force like other security agencies, it is a police service, it is an organization that provides security services to citizens, the legislatures should take care of it while making laws,' he said. 

Former Inspector General of Armed Police Shailendra Khanal also says that it would be wrong to weaken the nature of the armed police, which was established for the benefit of the country in dire circumstances. It is necessary to discuss how to make the army established with important mandates such as international border security, cross-border crime prevention and control, terrorist/terrorist activity control, and disaster management more effective in the interest of the nation. On the contrary, it is wrong to try to narrow the area of ​​responsibility," he said. 

When gold smuggling started from Tribhuvan International Airport, the government became more dissatisfied with the police station after deploying armed police for security checks at airport customs and international arrival hall last year. This responsibility has been included in the armed forces bill for the last time. The police are even more angry with the government. Home has not been able to reassure the police about why this right has been given to the armed forces. 

Recently, armed forces have also got the responsibility of arresting foreigners who have infiltrated through the international border and sending them to the relevant agencies for investigation. Provision is made in the bill to give this right to the armed forces under international border security responsibility. The police said that this matter is strictly related to the criminal investigation and that the investigation is not part of the armed forces. 

The Armed Police Union is a body under the government. After the country went to a federal structure, police powers have been decentralized and distributed among federal and provincial governments. This has reduced the role of the police under the union. The police is also dissatisfied with this. 

Since its inception, the armed police has been deployed by the government for international border security. According to section 6 of the Armed Police Act 2058, among the major 11 mandates, the armed forces are being mobilized to protect the international borders towards China and India. After a decade and a half, the Act is about to be amended. In the preamble of the bill, it is mentioned that 'committed to the constitution, existing laws and human rights, making them professional, accountable and effective, to deploy them in the work of peace, security and order, disaster management, border security of the state of Nepal, border crime control, etc.'  Article 7 of the

bill includes "international airport security" in the provisions related to "mobilization, control, direction and supervision of armed police", which does not mention anything about the presence of armed forces in international airport security. Confusing wording has been inserted into Section 8 of the bill, which provides for government-backed provisions to allow armed forces to be deployed in border security. Armed forces officials say that it needs revision.

Former Inspector General Khanal expressed his displeasure by saying that there is a government-sponsored provision in section 8 of the bill that states that 'armed forces can be mobilized to control international border security and border crime'. "Armed Police is the dedicated force of the country for border security, no one can disagree on this. But the opportunity to play has been opened to such and such parties that they can be mobilized for border security. "It can be done" should be corrected to "will be done", he said, "Now this matter may seem normal, but elements adverse to the national interest can manipulate it later. Legislators should take it seriously." Aryal, a member of the platform, said that looking at some of the provisions of the police bill, it seems that the intention is to control the police in any way. "It is being tried to limit the work of the law enforcement agencies to the discretion of the law-enforcement agencies under the direction of a certain person," he said. This provision of the bill needs to be amended.' 

Aryal said that instead of investigating any crime by a paramilitary body like the armed police, there should be a provision to take control and report it to the related agency. "It seems that armed police have been given the responsibility of initial investigation, it needs to be amended," he said. Former Inspector General of Armed Forces Khanal says that since the armed police has been established as the "back force" of the army in national security and the leading force in the important work of internal security, it should not be left or right. 

There is a provision in the bill that the armed forces have the right to mobilize 'intelligence' in work including border security and cross-border crime. Nepal Police is also dissatisfied with this. Former Inspector General of Armed Forces Khanal argues that armed paramilitary forces must have an 'intelligence' mechanism. "The mandate that the armed forces are working with and it is being tried to be expanded by including it in the law, the organization that has been deployed as a paramilitary force for a decade and a half ago, must have intelligence, and the system of familiarization is also mandatory," he said. 

There is a provision in the current law for the government and the Ministry of Home Affairs officials to be involved in the promotion of the inspector general of both police organizations and staff evaluation. Officials of both organizations insist that it should be amended. Currently, there is a 30-year service period in both organizations, and the bill provides that only tenure and age are counted for retirement. 

It is mentioned in the bill that the tenure of the IGP in both police forces will be 3 years and the age limit will be 60 years. Officials of both organizations have expressed their displeasure that the age of AIG and DIG has been kept equal to 59 years and the term of office has been kept for 3 years for AIG and 5 years for DIG. Former IGP of Armed Forces Khanal says that this provision should be amended as it is not "fair". "On the one hand, we say that the inspector general should be promoted from within the AIG, but due to the weaknesses in the existing law, it is mandatory to send him to the leadership from the DIG. To address this, the terms of office of the IGP and the AIG must be different. Rather than who will benefit or lose, the issue is how to make the system." But in this, 'Seniority for promotion' is placed at the third number in the evaluation, efficiency and functionality are put forward. Dissatisfaction has been seen in both bodies.  Security officials also object to the provision of 20 points for the district police chief to be given 20 points by the chief district officer in the performance evaluation of

police. The system of evaluating the personnel of one army by another organization, that too by the civil service, is wrong. It needs to be amended, said former Inspector General Aryal. 

An official of the Ministry of Home Affairs, stating that the bill of both organizations has reached the House after a long homework, says that it will be decided by the Parliament. "Some people may not be satisfied with the legal provisions, since the bill has reached the legislative stage, it will be removed from there, we will not say anything about it," said the officer. 

The incumbent security officer has complained that the Ministry of Home Affairs used 'scissors' on the opinions sent by both organizations. They demand that the bill should be amended by the state law committee. They say that if the provisions of the scope of work are not amended in the bill, there will be misunderstanding between the two security agencies. Security officials have noted that certain responsibilities/jurisdictions and operational arrangements have been abstracted. 

Although the work, duties and rights are mentioned in the existing Police Act, it is guided by the management regulations regarding service and conditions. A decade ago, the Supreme Court had given a mandate to cover the provision of service conditions in the Act after the government started making arbitrary changes in the 'rules' by amending the 'rules'. According to the mandate issued in the writ filed by then AIG Madan Khadka on 20th of Chait 2070, the government has included the provisions related to service conditions in the bill.

The Armed Police is a paramilitary force established by transferring manpower from the Nepal Police and the Nepali Army, with tasks such as controlling the 'violent' activities of the then rebel Maoists, border security, etc. The role of the armed forces in disaster management, security of specific persons, security of important buildings/structures, search and rescue etc. is included in the recent act. In the armed forces, apart from deployment and assignment, most of the arrangements for service and conditions have been made in the regulations. For that reason, there are complaints that the Council of Ministers has amended the regulations according to their own preferences. In the bill submitted in the House of Representatives, the provisions of service conditions have been kept.

When the armed police force was established, 11 jurisdictions were assigned, including international border protection, from controlling violent and separatist activities. On October 11, 2079, the Council of Ministers assigned two more 'mandates' to the armed forces, namely revenue, customs and industrial security and railway security on December 15, 2077. The Armed Police operates as a 'Dedicated Force' in international border security. But there is a complaint from the serving and retired officers of the armed forces that the bill has not been mentioned as a 'dedicated force' for border security. 

Former Inspector General of Armed Police Shailendra Khanal said that despite the government's commitment to develop the armed forces as a 'dedicated force' for border security, the bill is trying to focus on other issues. "The bill has not been able to address the core mandate of the organization," he said, "The armed forces should be explained as a leading 'dedicated force' in border security." Deputy Inspector General of Nepal Police, Upendra Kant Aryal and Nbsp, which was caused duplication in the workholder, and NBSP; then General Indexted, Outside, 2071/72, 2071/10. Concerning the inspector of corruption with corruption administration was improved only after the Majakirn Rai became the inspector General of the Majar Kumar Maji. & Nbsp;