Submit your Article

The judiciary in Nepal has been under increased criticism in recent years due to claims of political meddling, corruption and incompetence. Historically seen as the last bulwark of justice and the last judge of constitutional norms, the court has revealed weaknesses in its defenses. These cracks expose a deeply ingrained misconception: that Nepal’s court is completely impartial and impervious to corruption. In actuality, Nepal’s judiciary’s independence is still a complicated illusion that is influenced by both internal and foreign factors. It should serve as a check on authority, a defender of the law, and an upholder of justice, as is the case in many democracies. But in Nepal, a number of issues make it less successful, which makes people wonder if it really reflects these principles or if it is just a façade. The independence of a court is essential for upholding the rule of law. 

However, political interests frequently exert pressure on Nepal's court, undermining its independence. Appointments and decisions can be influenced by political parties and their leaders, raising questions about potential bias. A conflict of interest arises when judges are chosen based more on their political connections than their qualifications, raising questions about their capacity to make unbiased decisions.

Political appointments

Political meddling in the selection of judges is the main grievance directed at Nepal’s judicial system. Although political forces frequently exert excessive influence, the constitution has procedures intended to guarantee neutrality in appointments. There is a contradiction of independence inside dependency since the Judicial Council, which is in charge of nominating judges, has members who are also chosen by political players. This system, which is supposed to maintain a balance of power, unintentionally makes it possible for political objectives to influence the court. The politicization of Nepal’s court is another mistake. 

Decisions that are influenced by politics undermine the justice and impartiality that the legal system is supposed to provide. Politicians frequently have excessive control over judicial nominations, guaranteeing that their supporters hold important posts. As a result, judges may feel pressured to support the interests of those who made their appointment possible, which undermines their capacity to act impartially and independently.

Myth vs reality

One of the main myths that is still spread is that corruption does not exist in Nepal’s courts. Although the court is generally regarded with respect by the people, persistent allegations of bribery and corrupt activities cast doubt on its impartiality. Subtle and pernicious corruption spreads through a number of avenues, from lower courts to higher judicial seats. The rule of law is allegedly undermined and public faith is eroded when judges are accused of favoring parties with financial incentives or influence.

Justice fatigue

The widespread backlog of cases in Nepal’s courts is another serious problem. Despite the basic right to a fair and prompt trial, many litigants must wait a long time for justice. Overwhelming caseloads, little resources and a shortage of staff are problems for courts. Some call this ‘justice fatigue’—a situation when litigants completely lose trust in the legal system—is brought on by the procedural delays. The idea that justice postponed is still justice is erroneous; in actuality, it is justice denied.

Obstacles to reform

Political opposition and bureaucratic delay have made Nepal’s judiciary reform a difficult process. Because of entrenched vested interests and a lack of political will, several attempts at structural transformation have failed. Constitutional clauses intended to protect judicial independence have been construed selectively, frequently in a way that benefits the powerful. Enacting significant change is difficult since it involves not just changing the legislation but also the culture in which the judiciary functions.

Restoring trust

Systemic reforms are necessary to rebuild public trust in Nepal's judiciary. Important initial measures include tackling corruption openly, ensuring that judge appointments are made on the basis of qualifications rather than political ties, and implementing technology to expedite case handling. More accountability, which may be attained by open audits and supervision, may also lessen the likelihood of corruption and rebuild confidence.

In summary, Nepal’s judiciary is at a turning point as it struggles with the myths of independence and incorruptibility. Both institutional change and a change in public opinion are necessary to achieve an independent and equitable legal system. Only until these ingrained misconceptions are confronted and dispelled by an unshakable dedication to justice and openness will Nepal’s judiciary be able to live up to these values. Significant obstacles confront Nepal’s court, undermining its function in the democratic process. Public trust is undermined by problems with accountability, independence and openness as well as political meddling. The judiciary must distance itself from political influence and make a commitment to impartiality and openness in order to operate efficiently. Nepal’s judiciary cannot genuinely become a pillar of justice until these changes are implemented.

In legal parlance, a ‘clean chit’ means the absolution of a person or entity from accusations or charges. It signifies that no proof of misconduct was discovered during the inquiry or trial, and the accused is officially exonerated of all allegations. A ‘clean chit’ refers to a result of any of the judicial process’s phases, such as an inquiry, trial, or appeal. This is a more thorough examination of its importance, process and ramifications. Although it’s a common word in the media, ‘clean chit’ has significant legal implications. In general, it alludes to the subsequent. 

Exoneration: A court or investigating body has officially ruled that the accused is innocent of all charges. This may occur at several points during the legal procedure. 

Absence of evidence: When authorities cannot gather enough evidence to prosecute someone, they frequently give them a clean sheet. 

Finality: If a person receives a clean sheet, it implies that, barring new information, no court cases pertaining to those accusations will be brought against them. 

What leads to a clean chit?

Stage of investigation: When law enforcement looks into a crime, if they find no solid evidence against the accused, they may give a clean chit. For instance, in police investigations or inquiries conducted by organizations such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in India, the subject or entity is handed a clean sheet if the report finds no evidence of misconduct. A ‘closure report’ or ‘final report’, suggesting that no charges be made, is prepared in such circumstances by the investigating officer.

Trial stage: In a court trial, the judge may dismiss the case, thus giving the accused a clean sheet, if the prosecution is unable to provide sufficient evidence against the accused. A court's acquittal also acts as a clean sheet, absolving the defendant of the allegations they were facing.

Appeal stage: An individual may occasionally be found not guilty at the appeal level, even if a lower court finds them guilty. An appeal court is said to have given someone a clean slate if it reverses a conviction and absolves them of all charges.

Implications

Legal status: The accused is regarded as innocent by the law, which is the most important and immediate consequence of a clean chit. Unless new evidence is revealed, they are not subject to penalty or additional prosecution on the same matter. 

Public perception and reputation: Even when an accused person is found not guilty by a court of law, they may still be subject to public mistrust. In high-profile situations, the person’s reputation may continue to be damaged by media coverage, which might result in persistent social or professional difficulties. 

Options for the accused: If an individual has been unjustly accused, s/he may pursue legal action for defamation or malicious prosecution. A clean record alone, meanwhile, does not always equate to payment or validation until further legal action is taken. 

Reopening of cases: In some circumstances, the authorities may decide to reopen an investigation if new information or evidence comes to light, particularly if there is pressure from the public or political arena. Legal inquiry does not always conclude with a clean sheet, especially in intricate or delicate matters.

Controversies galore

Perceived misuse: Clean chits have occasionally caused controversy, particularly when claims of partiality, corruption or political meddling are made. The public or media may claim that a clean sheet was granted in order to protect powerful people or organizations from legal action.

Appeal and review procedures: Although a clean record may end a prosecution path, there are procedures in place that permit case reviews, especially in situations where there is a suspicion of injustice. For instance, in India, a clean chit might be contested through public interest litigations (PILs) or appeals, particularly if there are concerns regarding the impartiality or completeness of the inquiry.

Clean chit in specific jurisdictions

India: The phrase ‘clean chit’ has been widely linked to prominent political and corruption scandals in India. Investigative agencies, including the CBI, Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the judiciary, at different levels are frequently involved in the process. 

High-profile cases: A number of prominent Indians, including politicians and businessmen, have gotten off lightly in criminal prosecutions, igniting discussions about the function and objectivity of investigative organizations. Problems with public trust: Because politically sensitive cases sometimes entail claims of improper influence over the investigation or court process, clean chits can occasionally breed public suspicion.

United States: The idea of a ‘clean chit’ in the United States is better understood in terms of an acquittal or charge dismissal. If there is insufficient evidence to support a prosecution, investigations carried out by the FBI or other law enforcement organizations may result in the accused being exonerated. 

Acquittal: In the United States, an acquittal by a jury or judge essentially acts as a clean slate, meaning that the accused is formally found not guilty of the accusations. 

Based on an inquiry, prosecutors are free to decide whether to press charges or not. If they choose not to, it may be interpreted as a kind of clean chit.

In the legal system, a clean sheet is an essential safeguard against unfounded allegations and against investigations or trials coming to an end due to a lack of adequate evidence. It does, however, also present issues with regard to public opinion, possible abuse and the requirement for judicial system openness. Even after legal culpability is removed, the effects on reputation and further scrutiny can occasionally persist, particularly when sensitive or public issues are involved.

Presumption of innocence, sometimes known as ‘innocent until proven guilty’, is a cornerstone of criminal justice systems around the globe. According to this theory, the prosecution has the burden of proof and an accused individual is presumed innocent until and until their innocence is established through a fair and impartial trial. It is both a defense against erroneous convictions and a necessary part of the right to a just trial. Presumption of innocence has its roots in Roman law, namely in the adage “Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat,” which states that “the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on the one who denies.”

This idea became well-known in the late 18th century, thanks to the writings of legal scholars like Sir William Blackstone, who is credited with saying, “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” Over time, this idea persisted and shaped the evolution of contemporary legal frameworks. But it didn’t become well-known in European legal systems until the Enlightenment. Prominent thinkers like Voltaire and Cesare Beccaria fought for the rights of the accused, highlighting the need for fair trials and the presumption of innocence. A further testament to the presumption of innocence was the French Revolution's 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, which stated that “Every man is presumed innocent until he has been declared guilty.”

Legal structure

A number of important international law texts contain references to the presumption of innocence. According to Article 11 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which they have had all the guarantees necessary for their defense.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) stipulates in Article 14(2) that “Everyone charged with a criminal offense shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.” 

Constitutional recognition 

The presumption of innocence is specifically recognized by a number of national constitutions and legal frameworks. For example: The United States Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee that no one will be deprived of their life, liberty, or property without first undergoing a fair legal process. According to Article 48 of the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, “Everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.”

Article 20(5) of the Constitution guarantees the fundamental constitutional right to be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. In the same vein, the presumption of innocence in criminal cases is maintained by Section 12 of the National Penal Code, 2018. Therefore, in order to protect the integrity of the legal system, our hard-won liberties, and the dignity of the accused, criminal proceedings and the presentation of suspects urgently need to be changed. It is necessary to discontinue the widely used procedure whereby the Nepal Police parade detainees or individuals accused of minor offenses and issue statements, including information on the people they have detained, including pictures. The institution also needs to be cautious about the effects the practice might have on its investigations into the crime and the suspects, who might be found not guilty by the court. Thus, it is preferable to refrain from taking such rash decisions that can backfire and to inform the public and media until after the investigation is finished and the court issues a definitive ruling.

Principal’s significance

The protection provided by the assumption of innocence shields people from unfair allegations and incorrect convictions. It guarantees that the prosecution bears the burden of proof, having to prove the accused person’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This strict level of proof is necessary to prevent mistakes and preserve the public’s faith in the legal system. The idea of a fair trial is based on this notion. It ensures that the accused has the right to a defense, which includes the capacity to refute the prosecution’s case, have access to legal counsel, and submit evidence. The presumption of innocence protects the fairness and impartiality of the legal system by guaranteeing that the accused receives such treatment. 

In actuality, the presumption of innocent has several difficulties despite its significance:

Influence of the media, extensive media coverage in high-profile cases may cause the public to adopt conclusions about the accused’s guilt or innocence before the trial even ends. This phenomenon, sometimes referred to as ‘trial by media’, has the potential to compromise the trial’s impartiality and threaten the presumption of innocence.

Prior to trial retention, the presumption of innocence may be violated in some jurisdictions where people are detained in pre-trial custody for protracted periods of time. The fact that being detained alone may lead to feelings of guilt emphasizes the necessity for legal systems to strike a balance between the rights of the accused and public safety.

Practical and legal obstacles, reverse onus provisions—which transfer the burden of proof to the accused under certain conditions—may undermine the presumption of innocence in some judicial systems. It is important to closely examine these exclusions to make sure that they don’t compromise fundamental rights.

Presumption of innocence is a fundamental tenet of legal systems all throughout the world. It guarantees that no one is unfairly punished, and that the integrity of the legal system is upheld. Although there are still obstacles in the way of completely implementing this idea, its continuous inclusion in legislative frameworks emphasizes how crucial it is to preserving the rule of law and safeguarding human rights. Presumption of innocence is a fundamental safeguard in the criminal justice system that helps to ensure that people are not unfairly convicted and that justice is served. It sustains the public's faith in the legal system and supports the fundamental human right to a fair trial. But in order to prevent this principle from being undermined by the media, pre-trial procedures, and legislative changes, constant watchfulness is required.

Nepal has been experiencing chronic political instability for years, primarily due to disputes between major political parties over power-sharing arrangements. Internal strife and petty fights within and among the parties for power have brought frequent changes in government formed as a result of compromise between major parties and fringe parties, especially after the adoption of a federal democratic republic polity, disappointing a people aspiring for stability, progress and prosperity for long. Ruling coalitions, formed to seize or hold onto power, have long been a feature of Nepal's political landscape. Although this coalition-based system occasionally promotes cooperative government, it frequently results in conflicts and instability.

The clash

In Nepal, coalition administrations are the result of partnerships between several parties. More often than not, practical realities and not shared ideologies are behind ruling coalitions involving major parties like the Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML and the CPN (Maoist Center) and their junior partners. Due to a proportional representation system, which guarantees even smallest parties a place in the legislature, coalition-building becomes necessary. Although this system stipulated in the Constitution encourages diversity and representation, it also results in fragmented mandates, which necessitate ruling coalitions. In such alliances, conflicts often emerge around the assignment of ministerial responsibilities. Junior coalition partners feel left behind and charge the bigger parties with controlling important positions. Policy goals differ significantly, especially when it comes to foreign policy, federalism and economic changes.

Implications

A decade-long war has caused paralysis in governance. National development initiatives and economic recovery have suffered due to delays in crucial legislative and policy choices. Political unrest discourages foreign investment and has an impact on tourism, hitting the national economy hard. Business confidence has also decreased because of prolonged uncertainty. Frequent conflicts among ruling coalitions for power and prolonged instability have reduced public confidence in the democratic system. 

Way forward

Political observers predict that communication and compromise will be necessary to end disputes involving coalitions by ensuring the participation of all coalition participants in decision-making processes. The idea behind this exercise is to alleviate deep-entrenched feelings of marginalization. Creating a precise policy framework that describes the coalition's goals and tactics will aid in minimizing policy divergences. Coalition partners can avoid miscommunication and disagreements by having explicit, documented agreements that specify power-sharing arrangements, policy goals and dispute resolution procedures. Stability depends on creating strong democratic institutions capable of resolving disputes and guaranteeing that coalition standards are followed. Ideological differences may be closed and collaboration can be fostered by encouraging political parties to engage in consensus-building and communication. Restoring public participation in political processes can aid in restoring trust and guarantee that public officials remain answerable to their citizens.

Disputes within coalition governments bring to light the difficulties coalition politics inherently faces in a fast changing and varied political environment. Coalition governments encourage diversity and representation, but they also need careful handling of conflicting interests and power relationships. In order to ensure a stable and efficient government as Nepal moves closer to consolidating its democracy, it will be important to address these issues through unambiguous agreements, institutional development and consensus-building. 

The inherent difficulties of coalition politics are exemplified by conflicting goals and ideologies within Nepal’s ruling coalitions. In a multiparty democracy, ruling coalitions are necessary, such coalitions should have an appetite for compromise and the proclivity to put the greater good of the country above petty gains. Nepal’s political leaders should have the capacity to overcome these obstacles to foster political stability and long-term growth as the country continues on its democratic path. Conflicts within Nepal’s coalition administrations are a reflection of the larger difficulties of governing in a pluralistic democracy that is undergoing transformation. 

In a political environment marked by fragmented power, ruling coalitions are necessary, but they call for mutual respect, a careful balance of power and a common commitment to the advancement of the country. Nepal's future depends on the existing coalition’s capacity to resolve internal conflicts and provide stable administration. Notwithstanding obstacles on the way, a more stable and prosperous Nepal can be achieved through dedication and sincere cooperation.

The Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) is essential for an effective and safe operation of the nation’s aviation sector. However, because of its dual function as a service provider and a regulator, a major issue has emerged. This article examines the complexity of this conundrum, potential conflicts of interest, and ramifications for Nepal’s aviation industry.

Civil aviation authorities are often established to govern and control the aviation sector by setting safety standards, providing licenses and monitoring compliance. However, CAAN also offers a number of aviation-related services in Nepal, such as flight navigation, airport management and air traffic control. Concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest and objectivity in regulatory judgments are brought up by this duality.

A civil aviation regulator’s main responsibility is to guarantee the security and safety of aviation operations. To prevent accidents and incidents, regulatory organizations must implement high standards, conduct audits and monitor compliance. Questions concerning an aviation authority’s ability to maintain strict monitoring and objectivity arise when it acts as a service provider. The worry is that regulatory choices can be influenced by the need to sustain service revenue.

The inherent conflict of interest in the dual function issue is a crucial component. The authority’s financial interests as a service provider may conflict with regulatory choices made in the interest of safety. Transparency, accountability and public trust are all crucial components of an effective regulatory environment, yet they are all undercut by this contradiction. The possibility of conflicts of interest is one of the key issues brought on by CAAN’s dual duty. As a service provider, CAAN might put its own financial and operational interests ahead of those of others, which could occasionally conflict with its obligations as a regulator to uphold safety and fair competition. For instance, CAAN’s own financial success as a service provider might have an impact on decisions regarding the construction of airport infrastructure.

In order for regulation to be effective, it must be fair and open. There may be concerns about CAAN’s independence when the same organization is in charge of both the provision of services and their regulation. Fair and consistent laws that put the public interest ahead of financial gains are essential for the safety and expansion of the aviation sector.

The aviation industry in Nepal has been steadily growing, drawing both domestic and foreign firms. It is critical that CAAN’s interests as a service provider are not taken into account when making regulatory decisions in order to maintain a healthy and competitive market. If new entrants feel there aren’t any level playing fields, this situation can put them off.

In many nations, the civil aviation authority only performs regulatory duties, leaving other organizations in charge of providing services. By ensuring clearer lines between regulation and operation, this separation reduces possible conflicts and increases openness.

Nepal may think about changing the functions of CAAN to handle the conflict. Separate organizations for regulatory monitoring and service delivery could be established to help prevent conflicts of interest and advance a more open and competitive aviation sector. A step like this would bring Nepal’s practices in line with the world’s best practices and promote the security and development of the industry.

Several options could be investigated in order to overcome the difficulties arising from CAAN’s multiple roles:

Role separation: One strategy is to totally divide the regulatory and service provider roles. To ensure a sharper focus on safety and impartiality, this would need the creation of separate institutions responsible for regulation and service provision.

Strict governance and transparency: In order for CAAN to continue serving in both of its responsibilities, a strong governance structure and transparency tools need to be put in place. To manage conflicts of interest and guarantee that financial concerns are not influencing regulatory decisions, clear standards can be set.

Consultations with the industry: Involving stakeholders from the aviation sector in decision-making processes can help spot potential conflicts and guarantee impartial viewpoints. This strategy may result in cooperative solutions that put fairness and safety first.

CAAN faces a difficult issue because of its dual function as a service provider and a regulator. For the aviation sector to grow sustainably, the proper balance between meeting its requirements and guaranteeing impartial regulation must be struck. Nepal can overcome this challenge and establish a more open, secure and competitive aviation environment by embracing international best practices and reorganizing its functions. 

Nepal has evolved into a platform for international non-governmental organizations’ (INGOs) ‘revolutionary efforts’. These groups have been essential to the recovery of communities dealing with a range of issues because of their dedication to social justice and development. In Nepal, INGOs have been instrumental in resolving societal issues and promoting constructive change via their redemptive efforts. This article examines how these groups’ efforts not only result in social redemption but also act as a gentle prod to improve government accountability and also examines how INGOs work in Nepal to bring about good change and to act as a gentle prod, encouraging the government to take more responsibility.

INGOs in Nepal have been quick to respond to natural catastrophes and humanitarian emergencies by providing both short-term aid and long-term rehabilitation. Their redemptive endeavors go beyond catastrophe relief, exploring the fields of education, healthcare, reducing poverty, and empowering women. INGOs serve as agents of good change by tackling systemic problems and offering practical solutions. The education sector is one prominent area where INGOs have pushed the government toward accountability. These groups have built schools, supplied educational materials, and instituted teacher training programs; these actions have prepared the groundwork for a more comprehensive education system. 

The underlying message is very clear: Government accountability for providing high-quality education for all citizens is essential to the growth of society. INGOs have played a crucial role in bridging gaps and resolving imbalances in the healthcare sector. The construction of healthcare facilities, launch of public health initiatives, and distribution of necessary supplies all serve to highlight the dedication to enhancing public health. These activities subtly call on the government to give healthcare policy and infrastructure top priority because they understand the critical role that healthcare plays in ensuring population health. 

INGOs have moved into microfinance and poverty reduction efforts in an attempt to achieve economic redemption. These groups help to break the cycle of poverty by providing small enterprises with support, financial resources, and vocational training to local communities. The government is poignantly reminded of its responsibility to promote economic inclusiveness and sustainable development through the success of such programs. In Nepal, INGOs have taken the lead in questioning gender expectations and promoting women’s rights. Programs for women’s empowerment, from economic possibilities to education, strongly emphasize the value of inclusion. INGOs force the government to review and enhance laws that support women's rights and gender equality by doing this.

Obstacles and accountability

INGOs have made significant contributions, but there are still obstacles that need to be carefully considered, such as increasing reliance on them, coordination problems, and cultural sensitivity. Furthermore, the necessity of government accountability becomes increasingly evident when INGOs actively participate in community development. For lasting success, INGOs and the government must work together in a balanced manner. 

Even with INGO initiatives’ beneficial effects, problems still exist. Some opponents contend that local government mechanisms may unintentionally be weakened by INGOs’ influence. This necessitates striking a careful balance between bolstering domestic institutions and providing international assistance. #To guarantee sustainable development, there has to be open communication and accountability between INGOs and the government. Beyond its immediate effects on communities, INGOs’ redemption in Nepal also acts as a spur for government responsiveness and responsibility. Certain INGOs’ actions may be viewed as interfering with national sovereignty. This is especially true if it is believed that INGOs are imposing their objectives or dictating policies without taking into account the political, social and cultural environment of the nation.

An excessive dependence on INGOs for technical and financial support might lead to dependency. When INGO sponsorship wanes or changes in emphasis, the government may find it difficult to maintain programs and activities. INGOs may find it difficult to properly comprehend and honor the customs, social mores and cultural heritage of the area. Local communities may oppose projects that are in conflict with their cultural values. Certain non-governmental organizations may encounter censure due to their opaque operations, financial administration and decision-making procedures. This may give rise to questions regarding responsibility. 

INGOs encourage policy reforms, empower communities and address important social and economic concerns in order to push the government to be more inclusive, transparent and efficient. Collaboration between INGOs and the government will be crucial to ensuring sustainable and inclusive growth as Nepal continues on its development path. These groups act as a reminder to the government to fulfill its obligations as they support improvements in gender equality, healthcare, education and economic empowerment. 

Sustainable development necessitates a cooperative relationship between INGOs and the government so that the restoration of Nepal’s social fabric is a joint venture based on openness and responsibility. It is essential for INGOs and the government to work together harmoniously in order to build on past accomplishments and overcome future obstacles. They can steer Nepal in the direction of greater resilience, empowerment and accountability by working together. Redeeming efforts from INGOs in Nepal act as a little but powerful prod that encourages more transparency and responsive governance. Cooperation between INGOs and the government is essential as the country moves forward. This collaboration, which is based on open communication and common objectives, is essential to bringing about long-lasting improvement for the people of Nepal

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a Chinese project introduced in 2013, has generated interest and concerns around the world. Through a network of highways, railroads, ports and other infrastructure, it seeks to link Asia, Africa, and Europe. One of the 149 nations that have ratified BRI is Nepal. Between China and India, Nepal has experienced its fair share of BRI-related advancements. This article investigates the contention that Nepal will fall into a debt trap as a result of BRI and analyzes the economic, geopolitical and developmental ramifications.

Understanding BRI: The BRI is a massive international infrastructure initiative that aims to link nations through a network of ports, highways, trains and other crucial infrastructure. It aspires to improve connectivity, trade and investment between participating countries. However, worries have been mounting in recipient nations over a possible debt burden resulting from these initiatives. In the case of Nepal, BRI’s effects are wide-ranging and intricate. Before signing any agreement related to BRI, Nepal must thoroughly weigh its advantages and hazards. 

The debt debate: According to critics, BRI projects, most of which come with Chinese loans attached, could result in a debt trap where recipient nations struggle to pay off their debts, which reduces their ability to make strategic decisions. Nepal may encounter this problem, given its constrained fiscal capability. Also, proponents highlight the possibilities for infrastructure development, economic growth and job creation that BRI projects may offer to Nepal.

There is a chance that Nepal may gain a lot from BRI. It might help in enhancing the nation's connectedness, boosting its economy and generating jobs. However, there are worries that Nepal could fall into a debt trap because of BRI as China is presumably ‘giving unfavorable loans to developing nations to seize their assets’. This claim has been made in relation to BRI and other Chinese investment initiatives in underdeveloped nations. The debt trap argument is supported by some evidence. For instance, several nations, which borrowed money from China, have had difficulty paying back their loans and have been compelled to cede control of critical resources like ports. To be clear, not all Chinese loans are predatory, and the debt trap argument is frequently exaggerated.

BRI engagements: Nepal has expressed interest in BRI and sees it as a chance to address its lack of infrastructure. The BRI’s proposed cross-border road, hydropower, and railway projects have the potential to improve Nepal’s connectivity and energy security. The financial viability, environmental effect, and transparency of these initiatives continue to be a source of concern.

Risk factors

Debt sustainability: China’s loans account for a sizable amount of Nepal’s external debt, raising concerns about the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio. Implementing projects successfully and achieving strong economic growth are essential for repaying these debts on time and avoiding a debt catastrophe. 

Geopolitical implications: Given its ties to both China and India, Nepal’s participation in BRI has geopolitical implications. Maintaining a balance between these two powerful neighbors is essential for the stability of Nepal. 

Project viability: The long-term profitability, potential for revenue generation and adherence to environmental and social criteria all play a role in how economically viable BRI projects are in Nepal.

Mitigation techniques: Nepal might use a number of techniques to avoid falling into a debt trap and profit from the BRI. 

Transparent project evaluation: Thorough cost-benefit evaluations and open tendering procedures can be used to find projects that are both fiscally and developmentally feasible for Nepal. 

Diversified partnerships: Including a variety of parties like global financial institutions helps lessen reliance on a single lender and advance monetary stability. Put an emphasis on local benefits: Projects that promote local employment, technology transfer and skill development should be given first priority to maximize the beneficial effects on Nepal’s economy.

There are opportunities and hazards involved in the complex discussion of whether BRI will trap Nepal in a cycle of debt. To maximize the advantages and reduce potential risks of BRI, Nepal’s rigorous evaluation of project viability, transparency decision-making, and proactive interaction with different partners will be essential. Nepal’s response to BRI projects will influence its economic and geopolitical trajectory for years to come as the initiative develops.

An important corruption case that has been under investigation in Nepal for a number of years is the Lalita Niwas land-grab. The scam involves the unauthorized sale of public land in Baluwatar, Kathmandu to private parties.

The official residence of Nepal's Prime Minister, the main office of the Nepal Rastra Bank, and several other VVIP addresses are located close by. The probe has gotten more serious in recent months with many people detained in connection with the scam, including Min Bahadur Gurung, the proprietor of Bhatbhateni Supermarket, and former election commissioner Sudhir Shah. In response to a recent writ petition, the Supreme Court had ordered that the top decision-makers involved in the land ownership transfer process should also be brought under the purview of the investigation, not just those involved in paperwork. 

That order gave an impetus to the ongoing police probe into the scam.  

This probe under Nepal Police’s Central Investigation Bureau is testing the resolve of the Nepali state against corruption, policy corruption in particular. 

In the course of the probe, CIB has gotten hold of a cache of fraudulent documents, phony government stamps, and land ownership records. The CIB inquiry has shown that the Lalita Niwas land grab fraud was a well-organized scheme in which the defendants transferred government land to private individuals by abusing their authority.

After the apex court order, CIB recently questioned former prime ministers Madhav Kumar Nepal and Baburam Bhattarai in connection with decisions pertaining to the Lalita Niwas land transfer made during their premiership (25 May 2009-6 Feb 2011 and 29 Aug 2011-14 March 2013). But rumors that a CIB official visited the ex-PMs’ residences for questioning has made people wonder if this is a proper and credible way of conducting a probe. 

It should be noted that the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority, while probing the Lalita Niwas scam earlier, had exempted Nepal and Bhattarai stating that the Cabinet’s policy decisions were beyond the purview of its investigation, citing Section 4 of the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority Act. The court order and the CIB investigation have given the public fed up with endemic corruption and political instability a glimmer of hope. 

The Nepali public has every right to know the whole truth vis-a-vis the scam, including the guilty parties.

A free, fair and credible probe and the prosecution of those proven guilty will send a clear message that corruption is not tolerable in this country. It will also increase the public's trust toward the government. 

If political meddling botches the probe, it will deal a huge blow to Nepal's fight against corruption.