Submit your Article

In recent years, traditional media houses across the globe have resorted to layoffs as a last-ditch effort to stay afloat; if not for the long term, then at least for a few more years. This wave of downsizing began during the Covid-19 crisis and has yet to subside.

Media organizations are now restructuring into smaller, smarter and more agile newsrooms to cut costs. They are grappling with a severe financial crisis as conventional revenue streams dry up and new ones are slow to emerge. Nepal is no exception to this trend. To reduce expenses, many media houses are working to merge operations across print, radio, television and digital platforms into unified newsrooms. The only seemingly viable, though not well-thought-out option has been to scale down operations to match dwindling revenues. 

In this context, a wide range of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools could prove to be a boon for the fragile media landscape, potentially helping to fill gaps left by staff reductions. However, before embracing AI more broadly, it is crucial for media houses to formulate clear policies to ensure its ethical, transparent and effective use.

While some media houses have already started using AI tools, their applications remain minimal and largely unregulated. It is high time media houses moved decisively, from the Gutenberg-era newsroom to an AI-equipped, high-tech newsroom. A key first step in this transition is to provide training for journalists and collaborate with technology companies to develop customized newsroom tools. While the adoption of AI is not without costs, it can be a cost-effective alternative in the long run, gradually replacing outdated editorial structures.

At present, AI use in Nepal’s newsrooms is limited to individual journalists. Many AI-generated, translated or edited texts are published without any editorial supervision. While no comprehensive study has been conducted to assess the use of AI in Nepali newsrooms so far, a recent survey by Rajiv Timalsina, a student of Kantipur City College, provides some insights. According to the survey, 38 percent of journalists use AI tools for transcription tasks such as documenting interviews. Around 22 percent use them for fact-checking through platforms like Google Fact Check or image verification engines, while only 18 percent use audience analytics tools to understand reader behavior.

The next step after introducing AI tools is to train employees to use them effectively, particularly to improve the quality of writing and editing. Currently, there is a lack of trained human resources in the newsroom, and local journalists are still in the early stages of AI adoption.  While some non-governmental organizations have begun offering training, there has been little to no institutional collaborations.

Media houses must establish dedicated AI departments and AI editors to provide proper insight and guidance. Without this, the unchecked use of AI could lead to serious problems. If possible, Nepali media should also seek collaboration with international media organizations to learn from their experiences, though even global media outlets are still experimenting with AI integration.

In 2024, The New York Times publicly released a document outlining its approach to AI in the newsroom. The US media company said it does not use AI to write news or articles. It said it uses AI in three main ways: as a tool in the service of its journalistic mission, under human guidance and review and transparent use. Compared to other international media outlets, it has adopted a more cautious stance on AI use, maintaining that human creativity remains central to content creation.

In 2023, The Financial Times appointed Madhumita Murgia as its first AI editor. The following year, The New York Times rolled out its first generative AI features for subscribers. The same year, The Washington Post launched “Ask the Post AI”, which it described as a generative AI tool leveraging the publication’s deeply-sourced, fact-based journalism to deliver summary answers and curated results directly to users. 

In neighboring India, The Hindustan Times joined the AI race in 2024, establishing a 15-member team to work on GenAI-based initiatives such as news bots, personalization, audience engagement, monetization and subscription strategies. 

In Nepal, while journalists have begun using publicly-available AI tools, institutional adoption remains limited. However, some media outlets have started integrating AI technologies in various ways, from digital news readers to audio transcription, translation, image and text generation, and even news writing.

Providing summaries alongside news articles, with editorial endorsement, is a growing global trend. Onlinekhabar is among the Nepali media following this trend. Annapurna Post has also taken help of AI for its digital reader tool.  However, some news outlets, which lack strong editorial oversight, are publishing AI-generated summaries that are flawed or misleading.

With the use of AI at the individual level growing, media houses must ensure that AI is used responsibly and ethically. This is necessary both to maintain editorial integrity and to earn people’s trust. With strategic investment and collaboration with tech companies, AI could unlock new opportunities for Nepali media houses. 

AI tools can help summarize news stories, but editors must have the final say. The New York Times’ own experience shows that AI-generated summaries often fail to fully capture the nuances of original articles. Many believe that human-written summaries are still superior. Despite this, the US media company’s AI team has been refining its tools, acknowledging that while AI is not perfect, it can still help free up editorial staff for other important tasks. 

With the right human guidance, generative AI can also be used to create visuals to accompany new stories. Some Nepali media houses have started using AI-generated images, but these are only accurate when journalists provide detailed guidance. Otherwise, there is a risk of misrepresentation and factual inaccuracies. 

Resource constraints have long prevented Nepal media from producing investigative, analytical and in-depth news stories. AI could help bridge this gap. It can assist in scanning documents, analyzing data and identifying leads for investigative reports. These are the tasks that journalists often struggle to manage under tight deadlines. AI can also support wider and more efficient coverage by translating news into multiple languages to reach broader audiences. Some outlets in Nepal have already begun experimenting with this approach.

AI tools can be used to support news writing and editing. However, this should always be done under direct editorial supervision. These tools are best used to prepare preliminary drafts. For journalists, AI can help identify trending topics, suggest potential sources, summarize lengthy documents, conduct background checks and even engage audiences more effectively.

While investing in AI infrastructure may place an additional financial burden on media houses in the short term, it could prove vital to their long-term survival. On one hand, AI can significantly enhance the quality and efficiency of news production; on the other, a compact AI-powered newsroom can help reduce human resource costs. Compared to other countries, Nepali media remain behind in adopting technology. But the use of AI in newsrooms is no longer a distant possibility, it is a present-day reality.  The question is not whether to use AI, but how to use it effectively to harness its benefits.

Nepali Congress (NC) leaders have voiced serious concerns that chronic factionalism, dysfunctional party structures, intra-party betrayal and a lack of clarity over electoral alliances could severely hurt the party’s performance in the 2027 national elections.

During the ongoing Central Working Committee (CWC) meeting, several leaders urged the party leadership to begin preparations for the upcoming elections. These concerns have intensified in light of CPN-UML’s aggressive ‘Mission 2084’ campaign, launched shortly after the last election, and the CPN (Maoist Center)’s continued grassroots mobilization since 2024.

Senior NC leader Narayan Prakash Saud criticized the party’s inaction. “On the one hand, our organizations are becoming obsolete, and on the other, we are alienating parties that have historically supported us. There are clear signs we will receive fewer votes than we did in the previous elections,” Saud warned during the CWC meeting.

CWC member Dila Sangraula questioned the party’s readiness to contest elections without any alliances. “What preparations have been made so far?” she asked. “If we contest alone, will we win 70–80 seats under the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system—or just 25–30? Let’s think seriously.” In 2017, when NC fought the elections alone, it managed to secure just 23 FPTP seats while the UML-Maoist alliance dominated.

The party now finds itself in a precarious position. On one hand, grassroots cadres are pressuring the leadership not to form an alliance with the Maoists due to past tensions. On the other hand, should the UML and Maoists realign, NC fears a repeat of the 2017 defeat. Party President Sher Bahadur Deuba is in favor of forming an electoral alliance, while other senior leaders remain divided and inconsistent in their views. The ongoing CWC meeting has exposed a sharp internal rift over this issue.

Intra-party betrayal remains a key challenge. In 2022, several leaders backed by senior figures defied the official party line by fielding rival candidates. Now, the party is debating whether to take disciplinary action against them. Senior leader Shekhar Koirala has called for amnesty for these candidates. Meanwhile, the NC’s Disciplinary Committee, led by Ananda Dhungana, has received 21 complaints, most related to internal betrayal.

Some leaders also flagged growing public frustration with major political parties, including NC, which could significantly impact the 2027 outcome. They fear not only swing voters but also core supporters may turn to emerging political forces. However, senior leaders have dismissed this concern, arguing that traditional parties still enjoy broad support and are merely victims of a systematic smear campaign.

At the meeting, Sangraula pointed out that more than 80 percent of the public is dissatisfied with mainstream political parties, including NC. “Based on our conversations with local leaders and cadres,” she said, “the frustration we sense on the ground could prove disastrous for us in the next elections.”

Due to ongoing factional disputes, NC has long failed to hold general conventions for its sister organizations. Senior leader Shashank Koirala proposed amending the constitution to replace “secularism” with “religious freedom,” a long-standing demand of him.

He also called for a review of the mixed electoral system—FPTP and proportional representation (PR)—introduced in 2008. “This system prevents any single party from gaining a majority,” he argued, suggesting instead that all members of the House of Representatives (HoR) be elected through FPTP and the National Assembly through PR.

Senior leader Krishna Prasad Sitaula raised concerns over the judiciary, referring to the recent Supreme Court verdict on constitutional appointments made four years ago. “The Chief Justice was in the minority despite the constitution clearly stating the verdict must be delivered under the Chief Justice’s leadership,” he said. “It’s time we review how our courts function, from the district level to the Supreme Court.”

Party spokesperson Prakash Sharan Mahat said NC joined the coalition government with the expectation of having at least 50 percent influence. “It’s a coalition government, which makes it difficult to either stay or exit. But if we stay, our ministers must perform better than those from other parties.” Meanwhile, internal debates continue over whether the party’s general convention should be held before or after the 2027 elections.

Former President Bidya Devi Bhandari has rejoined the CPN-UML, marking a significant development in Nepal’s political landscape. She confirmed that she had renewed her party membership, which she had relinquished after assuming the presidency following the promulgation of the 2015 constitution. For a long time, there had been confusing and contradictory messages regarding her membership status.

Speaking at an event organized by the Madan Bhandari Foundation, she declared: “Now I am reunited with the UML as a member of this family, and I feel proud of this.” Her announcement comes close on the heels of a high-profile visit to China and a series of nationwide tours aimed at reconnecting with party cadres.

Bhandari’s political resurgence has stirred unease within the UML, particularly among Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and his close allies, including senior leaders Pradeep Gyawali and Shankar Pokhrel, who have openly expressed their opposition to her return. The situation mirrors an earlier controversy when former Vice-president Nanda Kishor Pun rejoined the CPN (Maoist Center) amid similar internal criticism.

Her return raises pressing questions about the party’s future leadership. Will Oli willingly transfer power to Bhandari or will the two compete for control in the upcoming party elections? Reports suggest Bhandari is positioning herself as a unifying figure, citing Oli’s health concerns and deepening party divisions, while also portraying herself as someone capable of bringing Nepal’s fractured communist factions together.

Oli had reportedly urged Bhandari to delay her public announcement to avoid stoking internal conflict. However, she insisted on clarifying her position ahead of the UML’s upcoming statute convention, arguing that transparency was necessary. Over recent months, Oli has publicly expressed dissatisfaction with Bhandari’s intent to return to party politics. Meanwhile, there is also a growing public debate over whether it is appropriate for a former head of state to re-enter active politics.

The immediate challenge before the UML leadership is to assign Bhandari a role—similar to what the Maoist Center did for Nanda Kishor Pun, who returned to politics despite internal resistance. While Bhandari’s comeback may not pose a direct challenge to Oli’s leadership in the short term, it could undermine the ambitions of second-rung leaders vying to lead the party.

Key contenders to succeed Oli include Ishwar Pokhrel, Shankar Pokhrel, Bishnu Poudel and Pradeep Gyawali. Given her stature as a former president, her late husband's legacy and her recent outreach, analysts suggest Bhandari could dominate the UML’s direction for the next decade if she secures the party leadership.

Bhandari’s re-entry has already triggered polarization within the party. Many leaders previously distanced from Oli have now aligned with her. Since the departure of senior leader Madhav Kumar Nepal, the UML had largely avoided public factionalism, with Oli maintaining a tight grip on internal power. In the party's 10th convention, Oli’s attempt to be elected unanimously was challenged by Bhim Rawal, leading to a formal election process. Rawal later left the party.

Bhandari has vowed to strengthen the UML into a decisive political force ahead of the 2027 elections, emphasizing that internal unity could lead the party to a majority, an idea that resonates with many party leaders and cadres. Her return could also accelerate the defection of CPN (Unified Socialist) members to the UML, as many disillusioned leaders see no future in the party, especially after the CIAA filed a corruption case against Madhav Kumar Nepal.

Her re-entry comes at a crucial time, as the party prepares for its statute convention and a leadership convention in the years ahead. Oli, who became party chairman in 2015 and was re-elected in 2021 with 1,840 votes against Bhim Rawal’s 223, has not confirmed whether he will seek a third term. Bhandari has expressed optimism about Oli continuing as the party leader. The UML has scheduled its statute convention for August, and the leadership convention is planned within the next five years.

General Secretary Shankar Pokhrel has openly opposed Bhandari’s comeback. Speaking at a party event in Pokhara, he stated that the former president cannot overstep the UML’s vision of development and prosperity. He warned that opportunist forces were attempting to weaken the party from within.

Speaking at a separate event the same day, Oli echoed similar concerns, warning party members against encouraging factions working to influence the upcoming general convention. “The party is on a mission for 2084 (2027),” he said, referencing the next national election. Pokhrel had earlier proposed barring Bhandari’s return to party politics by effecting changes in the party statute. 

Bhandari, however, remains firm in her political vision. She has pledged to further advance people’s multiparty democracy, an ideology propagated by her late husband, Madan Bhandari. The core of this ideology is the belief that communist parties in Nepal must embrace parliamentary democracy instead of adhering to orthodox communist principles. 

Her reentry also carries geopolitical implications, as both India and China closely monitor her political trajectory. While Beijing welcomed her during her recent visit, where she met senior Chinese Communist Party officials.  Striking a diplomatic tone, “India and China’s socio-economic progress inspires us. We must strengthen ties with both to build mutually beneficial partnerships,” said Bhandari.

People’s trust in the media is fast declining, if not hitting the rock bottom, already. As a professional journalist with no political affiliation, I have spent two decades in this field, witnessing both highs and lows of Nepali media industry. In the early years of my career, the media was all flourishing: newspaper circulation was rising, radio and television were booming, and college classrooms were filled with enthusiastic media students. Now, the trend has sharply reversed. 

The current state of Nepali media bears some superficial resemblance to American media from 1900 to the 1940s. During that period, US newspapers were characterized by partisan, sensationalism, public criticisms over media performances, abuse of media power and growing concerns about the media’s negative impact on democracy. In response to these issues, American educator Robert Hutchins was appointed to lead a blue-ribbon panel to study the challenges facing US media. 

This piece broadly explores the current crisis of credibility in the media, the government’s attempt to control the press and what a wise and transparent approach to media regulation should look like. We must openly acknowledge that public trust in us is eroding due to a multitude of factors.

Only by first admitting this can we begin to rebuild the trust. At the heart of the media’s current crisis lies a widespread violation of journalistic ethics. Financial struggles are already a serious concern. But if journalists commit to upholding ethical standards, public criticism can at least be reduced, if not entirely silenced. 

It is not only digital platforms which are flouting journalistic codes of conduct. Traditional media, which pride themselves on being part of the mainstream, are also flagrantly violating ethical norms, further fueling public distrust. The erosion of confidence in media is not unique to Nepal; it is a global trend that began in the early 2000s and it continues to deepen. A recent report by the Reuters Institute revealed that only 40 percent of people trust the media. The silver lining, however, is that this figure has not declined over the past few years.

 In fact, trust in news has remained stable for the third consecutive year, even though it is still four percentage points lower than it was at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, public trust in the media continues to erode gradually. For instance, in recent years, the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority(CIAA) has filed cases against more than half a dozen journalists, alongside government officials, for their alleged involvement in corruption and irregularities. Meanwhile, people are struggling to distinguish between news, views and advertisement and paid content.   

Another problem is the structural weakness of Nepali media houses. The ongoing economic crisis is forcing many media outlets to carry out mass layoffs, severely weakening newsrooms. This has not only affected field-based reporting but also undermined the gate-keeping—selecting, filtering and refining the news before it reaches the public. As a result, ordinary citizens are increasingly questioning the accuracy, balance and credibility of the news they consume.

One of the most corrosive issues in Nepali journalism today is the political affiliation of journalists. Many spend more time on social media than in the newsroom, either defending their preferred political parties or attacking their rivals. The level of political alignment among journalists has reached an alarming level. People no longer trust content produced by those who openly align with political parties and shape their social media presence accordingly. Journalism is being misused as a stepping stone for political appointments or personal financial gains. 

Professional journalists are facing pressure not just from political actors but from their own colleagues affiliated with political parties or power centers. If a journalist publishes critical news about these parties or centers, affiliated colleagues often retaliate by undermining or attacking the former. Journalists who maintain independence are finding it increasingly difficult to survive in such a hostile environment.

Another growing problem is the media’s overreliance on social media content, due in large part to the decline in field reporting. This has led to a troubling trend: journalists often use unverified social media posts as the basis for news stories. Recently, a prominent journalist published a report based on rumors circulating online. 

Although filing a cybercrime case against him was unjustified, the video content he produced was clearly problematic and damaged the credibility of the media outlet involved. Those in power are now using such incidents as a pretext to clamp down on the media. Several news stories based on unchecked social media information have sparked controversy. Even worse, there is a growing reluctance among media houses to acknowledge mistakes or issue timely corrections.  

Due to these ethical lapses, all three branches of the state—the executive, legislature and the judiciary—believe that the media should be tightly regulated. The problem is further complicated by the inability of the politicians to distinguish between professional news content and personal social media posts. On that basis, they are attempting to suppress independent journalism, especially as it continues to expose corruption and irregularities. With corruption at an all-time high and politicians and government officials implicated, the media has effectively become their enemy.

Every draft of media-related laws introduced by successive governments directly contravenes the international treaties and convention to which Nepal is a party, and also violates the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and expression. There is now rhetoric within the parliament in favor of restricting the media, while the executive branch is employing various means to jail journalists. The judiciary, once considered a last resort for journalists seeking justice, is letting journalists down, more often than not.

The judiciary plays a vital role in safeguarding freedom of speech, expression and the press by checking the executive’s attempts to impose suppressive laws. Historically, Nepal’s judiciary upheld these principles, from the Panchayat era to King Gyanendra’s direct rule. Unfortunately, the current reality is quite the opposite. 

The judiciary has become more restrictive toward press freedom, emboldening those who wish to curtail it. Courts are now misusing the contempt of court provision to harass journalists and even issuing orders to remove published news content in a clear violation of constitutional norms. 

The media fraternity itself is partly to blame for this situation, having failed to support the enactment of a clear and fair contempt of court law. It is ironic that during times of autocracy, Nepali media stood firmly in defense of press freedom, but in the republican era, that commitment appears to be wavering. A close examination of recent bills related to the media, social media and information technology reveals that the government’s aim is control, not regulation. These efforts undermine the principles of responsible journalism and the social responsibilities of the media. 

As I conclude this piece, I return to the Hutchins Commission report of 1947. To address media shortcomings, the US did not control the press, doing so would have violated the First Amendment, which explicitly states, “Congress shall make no law, abridging the freedom of the press.” Instead, the focus was placed on promoting ethical standards and media accountability. In our context, any attempts to control the media would violate the 2015 constitution and international treaties and conventions to which Nepal is a party. 

Those in power must understand that ethical reform is a far more effective tool than legal coercion for addressing shortcomings of the media. At the same time, collaboration between private media, academic institutions and the government can help find solutions. If necessary, a powerful commission similar to Hutchins Commission can be formed. The state can take a range of non-intrusive measures to promote ethical standards without interfering in press freedom.

The executive, the judiciary and the legislature must urgently abandon their current restrictive mindset. Attempts to control the media will not resolve its shortcomings; it will make the matter worse. We in the media must also recognize that public criticism of our work is both real and justified, and we must act responsibly.

Former President Bidya Devi Bhandari has announced her return to active politics under the ruling CPN-UML, marking a significant shift in Nepal’s political landscape. 

She confirmed renewing her party membership, which she had relinquished after assuming the presidency following the promulgation of the in 2015 constitution.

Speaking at an event organized by the Madan Bhandari Foundation, a party think tank named after her late husband, she declared, “Now I am reunited with the UML as a member of this family, and I feel proud of this.” Her announcement comes after a recent high-profile visit to China and a series of nationwide tours aimed at reconnecting with party cadres.

Her political resurgence has stirred tensions within the UML, particularly with Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and his close allies, including senior leaders Pradeep Gyawali and Shankar Pokharel, who have openly opposed her return. 

This mirrors the earlier controversy when former Vice President Nanda Kishor Pun rejoined the CPN (Maoist Centre) amid similar criticisms. The situation raises pressing questions about the party’s future leadership. 

Will Oli peacefully transfer power to Bhandari, or will the two clash for control in upcoming party elections? Reports suggest Bhandari is positioning herself as a unifying leader, citing Oli’s health concerns and internal party divisions, while also presenting herself as a figure capable of bridging Nepal’s fractured communist factions.

Oli has reportedly urged Bhandari to delay her public announcement to avoid fueling factionalism, but she insisted on clarifying her stance ahead of the UML’s statute convention, arguing that transparency was necessary. Her return could disrupt the ambitions of second-tier leaders like Ishwar Pokhrel and Bishnu Poudel, who were seen as potential successors to Oli. Given her stature as a former president, her late husband’s enduring legacy, and her nationwide political outreach, analysts suggest she could dominate the party for the next decade if she secures the presidency.

Bhandari has vowed to strengthen the UML into a decisive force ahead of the 2027 elections, emphasizing that internal unity could secure the party a majority. Her reentry also carries geopolitical implications, as both India and China closely monitor her political trajectory. While Beijing welcomed her during her recent visit, where she met senior Chinese Communist Party officials, Delhi has historically viewed the UML with skepticism, preferring instead to engage with Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal. Striking a diplomatic tone, “India and China’s socio-economic progress inspires us. We must strengthen ties with both to build mutually beneficial partnerships,” said Bhandari.

Her return has sparked debate over the ethical implications of former heads of state reentering partisan politics, though no legal barriers prevent her from doing so. Critics question whether her ambitions align with democratic norms, while supporters argue that her experience and legacy make her a stabilizing force for the UML. As the party prepares for internal elections and the next general elections, Bhandari’s resurgence promises to reshape Nepal’s political dynamics, with repercussions extending beyond the UML to the broader balance of power in the region.

Following pressure from opposition parties, the government formed a probe panel to investigate the visit-visa scam. However, the move has failed to satisfy key opposition parties, including the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP). These parties argue that instead of a panel led by former Chief Secretary Shankar Das Bairagi, who himself is under scrutiny by the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority, a parliamentary probe committee should have been formed. 

Despite these criticisms, the panel has begun its investigation, though public expectations remain low due to past failures in implementing such committees’ recommendations. Nevertheless, the panel’s formation has helped the CPN (Maoist Center) save face. For now, discussions about a potential government change have subsided, with both opposition and Nepali Congress (NC) leaders refraining from further statements. However, given past unpredictability, the situation warrants close monitoring.

Meanwhile, the Janata Samajbadi Party Nepal (JSP-N), led by Upendra Yadav, has decided to withdraw its support from the KP Sharma Oli-led government, in which the Nepali Congress is a key coalition partner. While this move is unlikely to destabilize the government, the JSP-N justified its decision by citing the administration’s failure to ensure good governance, amend the constitution, and initiate economic reforms.

In parliamentary developments, the House of Representatives (HoR) has endorsed the budget for the next fiscal year, pending approval from the National Assembly. Opposition parties and independent lawmakers have protested, alleging that a significant portion of the budget has been allocated to the constituencies of top leaders from major parties.

On the political front, the RSP celebrated its third anniversary this week, with its chairperson, Rabi Lamichhane, who is currently in police custody, issuing an appeal to party cadres. The party is now focusing on expanding its activities nationwide.

The ruling CPN-UML, meanwhile, is preparing for its statute convention. Party Chairperson KP Sharma Oli has been tasked with drafting the political document, while Vice-chairperson Bishnu Poudel will handle statute-related issues, and General Secretary Shankar Pokharel will oversee organizational matters. A proposal to impose a 70-year age limit and a two-term cap for the party chair is under discussion, a contentious point, given Oli’s age (74). In a recent public statement, Oli dismissed the debate as irrelevant. Separately, the party has revoked disciplinary actions against Binda Pandey and Usha Kiran Timalsina, who had been penalized for criticizing the party’s acceptance of business donations for its office construction.

In legal developments, former prime minister, Madhav Kumar Nepal, appeared before the Special Court after the CIAA filed a corruption case against him over the Patanjali land scam. Released on bail, Nepal claims the case is politically motivated, an allegation Prime Minister Oli denies.

The Election Commission is preparing for upcoming by-elections in select constituencies and local bodies. After consulting with Prime Minister Oli this week, the government is expected to announce election dates soon. Oli is also set to visit Spain starting Saturday, with a potential trip to India afterward. Notably, India has yet to extend a formal invitation to Oli, despite his over year-long tenure as prime minister, a delay that remains unexplained.

On the policy front, the Supreme Court has issued an interim order barring government agencies from imposing restrictions on ride-sharing services. Under pressure from transport syndicates, the Gandaki provincial government has paused its plan to legalize ride-sharing. The court has also urged transport entrepreneurs to avoid disruptive strikes.

In the energy sector, Nepal has withdrawn the ‘take and pay’ provision from its budget following pressure from independent power producers. This provision, related to power purchase agreements with private developers, was a last-minute concession after the Nepali Congress (NC) intervened.

Within the NC, senior leader Shekhar Koirala continues pushing party president Sher Bahadur Deuba to hold the general convention before the 2027 elections. Koirala and Gagan Kumar Thapa fear that delaying the convention until after the polls could allow Deuba, who is set to become prime minister before the elections, to influence the outcome.

In foreign affairs, Nepal has paused its evacuation plan for citizens in Israel following the Iran-Israel ceasefire. At Nepal’s request, India has assisted in repatriating Nepalis from Iran, with six out of 16 evacuees already returned. Meanwhile, around 1,000 Nepalis in Israel have registered to return, but the government has slowed the evacuation process.

Finally, Nepal and India held productive talks on security and defense cooperation, covering joint military exercises, disaster relief, and personnel exchanges. While Indo-Nepal defense ties have remained strong over the past 70 years, Nepal has also recently deepened its defense collaboration with China.

The Donald Trump administration is yet to decide the fate of the ongoing projects under MCC. 

Issuing a press statement, the US Embassy in Kathmandu said:  “In February 2025, the Secretary of State approved a specific exception to the 90-day pause on US foreign assistance for the MCC Nepal Compact, while the US government review on US foreign assistance continues.” 

Under this exception, the MCC Nepal Compact is authorized to continue with full implementation. MCC and the US mission in Nepal continue to engage stakeholders in support of a constructive outcome of the review, the statement said.

The US. Embassy added MCC is working closely with the Ministry of Finance and MCA-Nepal to ensure that the activities undertaken or initiated under the compact, including potential new obligations, are aligned with US and Nepal’s priorities and ensure transparency, sound governance, effective delivery, and prudent risk management.

The US Embassy also reaffirmed America’s commitment to its bilateral relationship with Nepal and supporting the Nepali people through efforts that promote prosperity and long-term economic resilience. 

The invention of the printing press by German inventor Johannes Gutenberg in the mid-15th century revolutionized the mass distribution of knowledge and information, significantly transforming the practice of politics. More than five centuries later, we are witnessing a similar technological upheaval with the explosive rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI), which is reshaping every sphere of society, including politics and democracy, at an even greater and more profound scale. While the Gutenberg press enabled the spread of knowledge, generative AI can not only disseminate information but also produce vast volumes of text, video, audio and images without human input. 

However, unlike previous communication technologies of the past 500 years, AI is a double-edged sword for democracy. Used responsibly, it can strengthen democratic systems. Misused, it could seriously undermine them. The impact of AI on democracy is complex and multifaceted. When harnessed properly, AI can enhance civic engagement, voter education, governance, election transparency and integrity. Democratic governments can use AI to solicit public input on policy matters or gather feedback during decision-making processes. Around the world, AI is transforming election campaigns and automating electoral procedures. In Nepal, the government could use AI-enabled platforms to gather public feedback on its proposed AI policies and regulations. AI can also serve as a tool to combat fake news, disinformation and misinformation which undermine democratic institutions and erode public trust. Moreover, AI has the potential to reduce election costs for both the state and political parties, minimizing the influence of money and muscle in shaping voting behavior.

At the same time,  AI also presents serious threats to democracy. Deep fakes, AI-generated content that convincingly mimics real people and events, are already blurring the lines between truth and fake.  In Nepal, a flood of AI-generated misinformation is spreading across social media, targeting politicians and political parties, and eroding public trust in the political system. Unfortunately, there has been little research or public debate on this issue, even as malicious actors continue to exploit these tools to manipulate opinion.

There is no concrete data yet on the extent of misinformation and disinformation in Nepal’s 2017 and 2022 elections. However, it is clear that these issues will significantly affect future polls. Candidates with greater financial and technological resources are likely to benefit disproportionately. This will widen the gap between the powerful and the under-resourced.

In the recent 2024 and 2025 elections in countries like India, the US, Germany and across South Asia, AI-generated false content was widely circulated to influence voters. While high levels of digital literacy in some of these democracies may have mitigated the impact, countries like Nepal, with lower digital literacy, remain highly vulnerable to such tactics. Additionally, Nepal faces the risk of Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI), as observed in recent elections in India, the US and Taiwan, due to its geopolitical factors and the preference of big powers over one party over other to advance their strategic interests. Some signs of FIMI were observed during the debate over the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) between 2019 and 2022. However, this remains to be independently verified.

Due to low digital literacy, many in Nepal are unable to recognize AI-generated fake content which shapes public opinion and even influences top politicians. For instance, senior leader Bam Dev Gautam once called on Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli to resign based on a fake video. In such a context, AI is more likely to exacerbate democratic vulnerabilities unless strong regulation is put in place. 

Deliberations are underway across the world about AI governance and regulation. While the European Union, Germany and the United Kingdom have made some progress, even their approaches are struggling to keep pace with the rapid evolution of AI. In 2024, the United Nations emphasized the need for a global AI regulatory body. A UN report noted that if AI-related risks grow more severe and concentrated, the world may need a stronger international institution with monitoring, enforcement and accountability powers.

Nepal is still in the early stages of AI governance. Even though AI adoption in sectors like health, education and governance is increasing, the unchecked use of AI for spreading misinformation has been a concerning issue for the country. Although the government has drafted the National Artificial Intelligence Policy, 2025, public awareness has remained low. Feedback from stakeholders has also been mixed. The policy envisions establishing a National AI Council, AI Regulatory Body and an AI Excellence Center.  However, there has been delay in preparing legal and institutional frameworks to set up these institutions. Moreover, the draft policy misses some crucial aspects of AI regulation.

Globally, companies like Microsoft, Amazon and Google dominate the market for cloud computing resources used to train and deploy AI models. In Nepal, AI systems are likely to be controlled either by government agencies or by corporate entities close to power. In this context, time has come to discuss the idea of publicly-owned AI, developed and managed for the collective good. We must also begin discussions on creating a democratic, robust and transparent institution to govern AI in the national interest.

To make this a reality, the government must invest in AI capacity-building, including training human resources capable of leading AI governance. To reduce the harms and maximize the benefits of AI in democratic systems, state institutions must act now. In particular, the Election Commission should develop specific policies and infrastructure to safeguard upcoming elections from AI-enabled threats and malign actors seeking to erode democracy.