Users have said that some members of his government were forced by the military to use landlines instead of mobile phones, given the sensitive situation at the time.
What you should know
In a news item titled ‘The then Prime Minister and ministers claim that the army confiscated their phones’ published in Kantipur on Kartik 3, 2082, UML Chairman and then Prime Minister KP Oli claimed that the army confiscated his phone while he was the acting Prime Minister.
After the killing of 19 people on Bhadra 23, on the 24th, when the protesters advanced towards the Prime Minister's residence in Baluwatar, the army rescued him by helicopter and provided him with security. He was kept away from communication for three days, that is, until Prime Minister Sushila Karki was sworn in, and after resigning, he held a press conference stating that he was under the protection of the army. The user himself has said that the army forced some members of his government to use landlines instead of mobile phones, considering the sensitive situation at that time.
Since the situation was extremely sensitive and confusing for four days from Bhadra 23 to 27, a meeting of Gen-G, the President, the army and other allies was being held in order to find a way out for the country, and since a serious decision had to be made to reach a consensus for the appointment of the Prime Minister, many users within the security circle have themselves said that the army provided an alternative phone instead of a mobile phone, seeing that information could leak out.
After all, why did the country's acting Prime Minister have to be rescued by an army helicopter and kept in a barracks in Makawanpur? Why did the army have to impose a 'siege' without allowing mobile phone contact? What would have happened if the army had not safely hidden in the barracks and the protesters had tracked the phone location and surrounded the barracks? In such a situation, did the movement not intensify against the killings on Bhadra 23 and 24, a peaceful movement that had begun against the corruption, misrule, and injustice prevalent in the country? Did they hide in the army's shelter for 5 days, fearing the anger that arose after the protesters were shot dead? Instead of killing 19 people on the first day of the movement and innocent children the next day, did they shoot them as a warning to take the right steps by accepting the demands of the protesters?
Who was the head or prime minister of the Nepal government during the above period? Should he take responsibility for all the incidents that occurred while he was in government or not? On Bhadra 24, when protesters rioted, many were shot dead, and a fire broke out in a nationally important structure, he gave instructions to suppress it, but instead of resigning, he instead intimidated the security forces, and when the army could no longer control it, he resigned and forced the army to pave the way, only after much damage had been done, and was forced to resign and flee in an army helicopter within 5 minutes, did he not admit it himself?
What would have happened if the army had not rescued the protesters within 5 minutes of entering Baluwatar? After the situation in the country had stabilized, the army took away their mobile phones, and what morality did they show by holding a press conference disobeying the decisions made by the government? History is witness to the fact that the country was saved from further great damage by giving an outlet through the tireless and difficult efforts of the President and Army Chief, Gen-G and Sushila Karki. Gangaraj Aryal, Panini-8, Pali, Arghakhanchi
