Pradip Paudel Slams Nepal’s Squatter Clearance Drive as Cruel and Inhumane

Nepali Congress General Secretary Pradip Paudel has sharply criticized the state’s approach to clearing squatter settlements, calling the process cruel, hasty, and deeply damaging for vulnerable families. Speaking at a program in Sanepa, Paudel said the government had moved too quickly and without offering residents enough time or practical alternatives.

His remarks come amid a widening debate over how Kathmandu should address informal settlements occupied by landless residents. While the government has said it does not plan to use bulldozers forcibly and claims the process is being handled through requests and relocation to safe locations, Paudel argued that the reality on the ground is far harsher for the urban poor.

Pressure, displacement, and distress

Paudel said the state’s actions have created significant psychosocial distress among people already living in fragile conditions. His criticism reflects a broader concern that eviction drives, when rushed or poorly managed, can intensify insecurity rather than solve the underlying housing problem.

Research on urban informality in Nepal shows that squatter settlements are often home to people with little or no land rights and limited access to basic services such as water, sanitation, health care, and education. The lack of legal security makes these communities especially vulnerable when authorities begin removal campaigns.

A long-running urban challenge

The dispute underscores a persistent policy dilemma for Nepal: how to manage informal settlements in rapidly growing cities without worsening poverty. Kathmandu Valley has long been associated with dense informal housing, unemployment, and inadequate public services, making eviction a politically sensitive and socially volatile issue.

Paudel’s intervention adds fresh pressure on the government to balance urban planning goals with humanitarian concerns. Critics of forced clearance argue that removals without credible relocation plans simply push already marginalized families into deeper instability.

What happens next

For now, the clash highlights the gap between official messaging and the lived experience of squatters facing displacement. The government says it is avoiding force, but Paudel’s remarks suggest that many residents still feel rushed, exposed, and unheard.

The bigger question is whether Nepal can develop a settlement policy that protects public land while also recognizing the rights, dignity, and survival needs of the people living on it.