Lably
Skip to content

Nepalese royal massacre

2001 killing of royal family members

  • 10 min read
  • 8 chapters
Narayanhiti Palace Museum which long served as residence and principal workplace of the reigning Monarch of Kingdom of Nepal. It was built by king Mahendra in 1961 following the design by Californian
Suraj Belbase · CC BY-SA 4.0

Related on Lably

Through Australia and India

Background

Birendra became king of Nepal in 1972 following the death of his father King Mahendra, inheriting an absolute monarchy known as the Panchayat system. After a referendum on restoring multi-party democracy was rejected in 1980, Birendra relinquished his executive powers in response to the 1990 People's Movement and abolished the Panchayat system. His later role as a constitutional monarch made him very popular and well-respected by the Nepalese population.

After Birendra's accession to the throne, the Shah dynasty began a custom of organising a private family dinner on the third Friday of each month in the Nepalese calendar, with different members exchanging hosting duties. The scheduled dinner event on 1 June 2001 was to be hosted by Dipendra at his residence, the Tribhuvan Sadan within the complex of the Narayanhiti Palace. All main members of the royal family were invited, except for Prince Gyanendra, who was in Chitwan.

Motive

Dipendra's motive for the murders is unknown, and there are various theories. The most commonly mentioned theory cites his relationship with Devyani Rana, whom he had met in the United Kingdom and had been dating for several years. Some allege that the royal family had objected to their potential marriage due to her maternal family background and her father's political alliances. Devyani's mother was from the house of Scindia, the former ruling family of the Gwalior State whose members were lower-caste and allegedly far wealthier than the Nepalese monarchs. The prospective bride's mother warned her daughter that marrying the Nepalese crown prince might mean a drop in her standard of living.

Another theory alleges that Dipendra was unhappy with the country's shift from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy, and that too much power had been given away following the 1990 People's Movement. Others, such as Li Onesto, have argued that the shooting occurred in the context of the ongoing Maoist revolution in the Nepali countryside and was the product of disputes over how to deal with the uprising, in which Birendra had been reluctant to mobilise the army against the revolutionaries, in contrast to Gyanendra.

Sign in to keep reading

7 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Contemporary