A/HRC/4/41 page 63 296. Reportedly, registering a first information report (FIR) was a difficult task, as it takes hours to convince the authorities that the case is under their jurisdiction. Police were reluctant to register the cases, mainly because high-level Royal Nepalese Army personnel are named in the FIRs. Criminal law in Nepal gives investigating authority to the sub-inspector, thus the ability of junior officers is questionable in cases where high-level security officers are involved. 297. No reply was received from the Government regarding this general allegation. Summary of the situation prior to the period under review 298. The majority of the cases reported to the Working Group allegedly occurred between 1998 and 2005 in the context of counter-insurgency operations by security forces against members and supporters of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), which had declared a “people’s war” in February 1996. 299. During the first phase of this conflict, disappearances occurred during police operations (1998). As security operations intensified, the number of cases reported increased during 1999 and 2001, particularly after November 2001, following the declaration of a state of emergency and the deployment of the Army. Following the breakdown of a seven-month ceasefire on 27 August 2003, there was a rapid escalation in the number of disappearances. Most cases concerned persons who were arrested by unidentified security forces personnel in plain clothes from their homes. In many cases, the subjects were rearrested by security forces immediately after their release on court orders issued following habeas corpus petitions. Although disappearances reportedly were taking place across the country, the majority of cases reported to the Working Group occurred in and around Kathmandu and other districts in central Nepal. The reported victims included girls, women, students, businessmen, farmers, workers, a writer, a government employee, a journalist and human rights defenders. The disappearances were attributed to security forces personnel, the Armed Forces and the police. 300. Regarding cases of three members of the Akhil Bharatiya Nepali Ekta Samaj (All India Nepalese Unit Society) who were reportedly arrested by the Indian Special Branch Police and handed over to Nepali security officials at the border, in Nepalgunj, in accordance with the Working Group’s methods of work, copies of these cases were sent to the Government of India. The same was done in the case of a Kashmiri residing in Kathmandu. It was reported that the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu was involved in the arrest; therefore, a copy of this case was also sent to the Indian authorities (see also section on India, paragraph 216). 301. At the invitation of the Government of Nepal, the Working Group visited the country from 6 to 14 December 2004. The delegation held meetings with His Majesty the King and other high-level officials, as well as with representatives of NGOs, relatives of the disappeared and members of the international community in Nepal. The Working Group found that the phenomenon of disappearance in Nepal was widespread; its use by the Nepalese security forces was arbitrary. Maoist insurgents also were reported to have committed widespread human rights violations. The mission report and recommendations can be found in document E/CN.4/2005/65/Add.1.