Even though the Commission of Inquiry on the incidents of 23 and 24 Bhadra has submitted its report to Prime Minister Sushila Karki, there is still uncertainty about whether it will be made public. There is a difference of opinion in society about who was the main culprit in the incidents of those two days that changed the course of Nepali politics. Therefore, it is expected that the truth will be known after the report is made public. In particular, who is responsible for creating a situation where young people lost their lives by suppressing the Gen-G movement on 23 Bhadra, who was involved in the arson, vandalism and looting the next day? Was there a pre-planned conspiracy behind the simultaneous arson attacks across the country or was it just a resistance to the previous day's repression? Nepali society expects that the report will answer such questions. Therefore, the report should be made public so that the public can know the 'truth' by reading it and the path to legal accountability will also be opened. 

After the government was formed under the leadership of Sushila Karki on 27 Bhadra, an inquiry commission was formed on 27 Asoj with a three-month term under the leadership of former Special Court President Gauri Bahadur Karki. The commission, which has been extended thrice, submitted its report on Sunday. Since the commission has completed its work, the responsibility now lies with Prime Minister Karki. Pressure is sure to increase on him to make the report public or not. Especially, the perpetrators of the incident that may be pointed out in the report may put pressure on him not to make it public. Those who believe that the society should be aware of the true details of the incident will demand that the report be made public. Prime Minister Karki should fulfill his constitutional responsibility by staying away from pressure and influence. People expect that the hawkish Prime Minister Karki will not leave the report shrouded in mystery. This is also one of his responsibilities when he was appointed Prime Minister on 27 Bhadra. 

If the report is not made public, conspiracy stories will become effective in society, which will create misunderstanding. A situation will arise where one person will keep making unproven accusations against the other but will not have to take responsibility. Mainly, the guilty are not punished. In such a terrible incident, some people are guilty, it is imperative that they be held accountable. Standards should also be established for the future. Similarly, when the report is made public, it will be easier to implement measures to prevent the recurrence of incidents like the 23 and 24 Bhadra incidents, so that we can prepare to avoid such tragedies in the future. 

We have many examples of hiding the reports of such commissions of inquiry and granting immunity to the guilty. A high-level commission of inquiry was formed under the chairmanship of Chief Justice of the Eastern Regional Court Janardan Mallik to investigate the incidents of the 2046 Jana Andolan. Similarly, a high-level commission of inquiry was formed under the chairmanship of former Supreme Court Justice Krishna Jung Rayamajhi to investigate the incidents of the 2062/63 Jana Andolan.

In 2072 BS, a commission was formed under the chairmanship of former Supreme Court Justice Girish Chandra Lal to investigate the repression of the protests in Madhesh and Tharuhat. But the reports of those commissions were not made public, nor were they implemented. As a result, those who brutally repressed the people during the protests were allowed to remain unpunished. Not only that, after the people's movement, many not only continued in their posts, but some also received various appointments over time. Due to such a trend, it has been alleged that political parties have made the people's struggle a mere stepping stone to obtaining posts. This is also one of the many reasons why old political parties have lost trust.