Submit your Article

Over the past five years, the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), under the leadership of Prem Kumar Rai, has sought to make the commission more proactive in controlling corruption and promoting good governance. Under Rai’s leadership, the CIAA has taken strong action against irregularities and corruption in public land, information technology, healthcare, and aviation sectors. In a special interview with Balkrishna Basnet and Surendra Kafle of Annapurna Post, the sister publication of The Annapurna Express, Rai, who rarely speaks to the media, shared his views.

You have completed five years leading the CIAA. Which areas did you focus on during this period?

There is widespread embezzlement and misuse of government and public land across the country. In many places, such land has been registered in individuals’ names. From the outset, I said my first priority would be to bring such land back under government ownership.

Second, at the policy level, I focused on reforming the Prevention of Corruption Act and the CIAA Act. These laws had become outdated and required amendments. At that time, sting operations had also been halted. From the beginning of my tenure, I made it clear that policy reform would be a key priority.

Third, public perception of the CIAA had become increasingly negative. I committed to restoring the institution’s credibility. These were the three main priorities I pledged to pursue.

When I first studied the condition of the CIAA, I found that digitalization had not been implemented. Immediately after assuming office, I prioritized digitalizing the entire system—from complaint registration to detailed investigation processes. This has made it easier to assess governance status and identify urgent actions.

What kinds of land-related cases emerged? What trends did you observe?

We are extremely weak in maintaining land records. Proper digitization has not been completed. It was found that even responsible agencies, such as District Administration Offices, local governments, and the Ministry of Land, had failed to adequately protect government and public land.

After the Land Act of 1964, a decision was made to bring land exceeding the legal ceiling—held by Rana elites, Shah rulers, and wealthy landlords—under government ownership. The CIAA has repeatedly written to the Ministry of Land Management to implement this decision. However, even after decades, excess land has not been reclaimed. This is a major institutional weakness.

Even after 50 years, such land continues to be misused. This reflects a failure on the part of the Government of Nepal. In Kathmandu Valley alone, one individual still holds more than 4,000 ropanis of land. There are many similar cases.

It is said that the information technology sector is even more chaotic. Is that true?

Yes, the IT sector was deeply problematic. Serious irregularities were found in the purchase, installation, and operation of software and related systems. After we assumed office, the CIAA began investigating this sector in depth for the first time. Previously, there was limited understanding of IT within the institution. Complaints were filed, but even investigators struggled to fully grasp technical aspects.

Because IT is complex and constantly evolving, officials often accepted suppliers’ claims without sufficient scrutiny. Procurement in the IT sector proved highly risky. Determining the actual value of software was difficult. Prices could be arbitrarily inflated, specifications manipulated, and verifying compliance required additional IT expertise.

A small group monopolized the sector. Since only a limited number of experts understood the systems, they exploited this knowledge gap. In projects such as the Teramocs system, Security Press, Government Integrated Data Center (GIDC), and telecom billing systems, prices were massively inflated. For example, equipment worth Rs 10m was sometimes priced at Rs 250m to accommodate commissions.

Besides land and IT, which other sectors showed irregularities?

Healthcare was another major sector. Procurement of medical equipment had long gone unchecked. Investigations revealed monopolies by a few agents. Once we filed some cases, complaints began to increase significantly.

In one instance, we spent three months in Madhesh Province, visiting municipalities and rural municipalities. We discovered collusion in drafting technical specifications tailored to specific companies. In some cases, specifications were written for one product, but cheaper alternatives were supplied instead. This was a common method of corruption. Like IT procurement, medical equipment procurement also involved serious irregularities.

It is also said that excessive equipment is purchased but left unused. What did you find?

Yes, this is another serious distortion. Both IT and medical equipment were often purchased beyond actual needs and left unused. By the time they were utilized, they had already become outdated.

There are many examples of equipment being purchased merely to exhaust budgets. In some cases, staff lacked the skills to operate the machines. In Madhes Province and other areas, equipment supplied by provincial authorities and the Department of Health Services was simply stored without use.

In places lacking manpower and infrastructure, unnecessary equipment was procured, creating opportunities for corruption. For example, while villages required basic blood-testing facilities, equipment capable of conducting 20 different tests was supplied unnecessarily. During the Covid-19 period, large quantities of equipment were purchased and later left unused, turning health facilities into storage warehouses.

How is the CIAA dealing with the alleged irregularities in the aviation sector?

We have only recently begun investigating airport construction. There appears to be misuse of budgets in this sector, with greater emphasis on spending allocated funds than on assessing actual needs.

Airports are being built larger than necessary, with excessive and unjustified expenses. For instance, Nepalgunj Airport, which was constructed at a cost of Rs 4bn, reportedly includes a shopping center, which may not be viable. Similar concerns have been observed at Bharatpur and Biratnagar airports. We are studying these issues and preparing further cases. We have already examined the case pertaining to Pokhara International Airport. The Public Accounts Committee also reviewed it and shared its report with us, which supported our investigation. A case has already been filed.

As for Bhairahawa International Airport, which was built with a loan from the Asian Development Bank, it is struggling even to repay interest. Despite this, additional infrastructure such as taxiways is still being constructed, and there are also discussions about building Terminal-2. Such activities are cause for concern.

Airports should only be constructed after thorough feasibility studies, as well as assessment of flight demand, potential returns, public benefit, and air route agreements. The same principle applies to proposed projects such as Nijgadh International Airport.

What kinds of threats do you face as chief commissioner?

In this position, I have simply fulfilled my constitutional responsibility. The commissioners and I act strictly within the authority granted by the Constitution. We do not act with bias or favoritism. Decisions are based on investigative findings.
Naturally, once cases are filed, not everyone will be pleased. In such roles, there are often more adversaries than allies. While direct threats are rare, indirect pressures do occur. Some individuals distance themselves after cases are filed.

How easy has it been to maintain good governance and control corruption?

Many people speak about corruption, but when asked to submit formal written complaints, they hesitate. Maintaining good governance and controlling corruption is challenging and requires collective effort.

There is a misconception that corruption control is solely the CIAA’s responsibility. Many complaints fall outside our jurisdiction, such as assault, fraud, marital disputes, and inheritance conflicts. Each year, around 37,000 complaints are registered, and most do not concern corruption. The CIAA handles only corruption cases. Recently, we have also been granted authority over money laundering cases, and three such cases have been filed.

The CIAA is not the only body responsible for controlling corruption. It is essentially the final resort and primarily a prosecutorial body. Nepal has federal, provincial, and local governments, and their responsibility is to prevent corruption at their respective levels. If they properly enforce laws and maintain accountability, the CIAA’s role would be minimal. The belief that the CIAA alone can control corruption is misguided.

There are widespread claims of corruption at provincial and local levels, aren’t there?

Yes, approximately 50 percent of corruption occurs at the local level. Development projects are sometimes effectively “sold” at provincial and local levels. There is widespread misuse of consumer committees in local governments. Unnecessary staff recruitment and excessive procurement have increased recurrent expenditure. There is a prevailing mindset that “anything can be done.”

Despite the CIAA’s efforts, this tendency has not fundamentally changed. The core issue is that our society appears to have normalized corruption. Our presence creates some deterrence, but without the CIAA’s interventions, Nepal might already have faced international blacklisting. Unless society becomes more aware and proactive, controlling corruption will remain difficult. No one should assume they can escape accountability.

Why is there dissatisfaction toward the CIAA?

Intermediaries or middlemen often play a role in attacks against the CIAA. When such actors influence state operations, they also attempt to influence the commission. Past controversies have also affected the institution’s image.

The CIAA must continue to demonstrate impartiality and independence. There is a tendency among some individuals to seek protection for themselves while demanding strict action against others. Such attitudes undermine good governance and make corruption control more difficult.

With just 20 days remaining before the election, a powerful anti-incumbency wave is sweeping across Nepal’s political landscape, placing senior leaders from all major parties under unusual pressure.  From long-established figures to leaders of relatively newer parties, few appear insulated from growing voter dissatisfaction.

A leader close to CPN-UML Chairperson KP Sharma Oli recently acknowledged the changing mood, remarking, “This is the first time Oli is truly contesting an election.” The comment reflects a striking shift in electoral dynamics.

In past elections, established leaders relied heavily on party networks and traditional voter loyalties. This time, however, even prominent figures are engaged in intensive door-to-door campaigns, signaling that electoral victories can no longer be taken for granted.

Pushpa Kamal Dahal, coordinator of the Nepal Communist Party and former chair of the CPN (Maoist Center), is also facing the heat. In recent public remarks, Dahal suggested that “external forces” are backing emerging political actors, a statement widely interpreted as a reference to the growing popularity of Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor Balendra Shah and other non-traditional figures. Dahal also argued that the “scenario on social media” differs from the “reality on the ground,” implying that digital enthusiasm may not necessarily convert into votes.

Analysts point to the rapid expansion of internet access and social media platforms as a key factor driving the current anti-incumbency sentiment. Platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube have become central arenas for political debate, criticism, and mobilization.

Studies conducted in various democracies suggest that increased internet penetration can weaken trust in traditional political parties and institutions. In Nepal, social media has amplified scrutiny of incumbent leaders and provided space for alternative voices. The digital sphere has also facilitated the rise of populist and anti-establishment narratives, eroding the dominance of established political actors over public discourse.

Beyond digital influence, long-standing governance challenges appear to be fueling public frustration. Major political parties have alternated in power for decades, yet many structural issues—ranging from unemployment and corruption to weak public service delivery and political instability—remain unresolved.

Voters are increasingly questioning senior leaders who have held the prime ministerial office multiple times. “If you have been in power repeatedly, why have our problems not been addressed?” has become a common refrain at campaign events, according to party insiders. This cumulative dissatisfaction suggests that the current wave is not merely cyclical but rooted in deeper structural grievances.

Nepal’s electoral contests were traditionally shaped by competition among four principal forces: Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, the Maoists, and Madhes-based parties. However, the rise of new political forces and independent candidates has disrupted this familiar pattern.

While these emerging actors may lack extensive nationwide party structures, they are capitalizing on voter frustration and presenting themselves as credible alternatives. Observers note that the anti-incumbency sentiment does not appear to favor any single opposition party; rather, it reflects a broader desire for new and “fresh” faces in politics.

Despite the prevailing mood, incumbent leaders remain hopeful that strong grassroots networks and organizational capacity will help them withstand the challenge. They argue that online narratives do not always translate into electoral outcomes and that traditional campaign mechanisms still hold influence.

Nevertheless, the atmosphere leading up to the polls suggests that this election is shaping up as more than a routine contest among parties. For many voters, it appears to be a referendum on the political establishment itself.

The Election Commission (EC) has started dispatching ballot papers to 12 electoral constituencies in 10 districts of Karnali Province. 

According to the EC, ballot papers have been transported to the constituencies of Salyan, Rukum West, Dolpa, Mugu, Humla, Kalikot, Jumla, Jajarkot, Dailekh, and Surkhet in Karnali province, informed EC's deputy spokesperson Prakash Neupane. 

Likewise, the commission stated that ballot printing has been completed for 124 constituencies in 58 districts. A total of 15,778,000 ballots have been printed.

A total of 14,341 boxes ballot papers, according to the EC, have been packed so far. Currently, around 1,000 boxes of ballot papers are being packed daily and 1.3 to 1.5 million ballot papers are being printed. 

Ballot papers for the House of Representatives elections are being printed at Janak Education Materials Center Limited, Sano Thimi. 

In the first phase, 1,098,200 sample ballot papers were printed and sent to various districts, the EC stated. 

A total of 20,830,000 ballot papers for the HoR election towards proportional representation were printed, packed, registered, and prepared for transportation, it has been informed. 

Similarly, the EC has stated that 20,323,000 ballot papers are required to be printed for the First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) election. Printing of ballot papers for the direct election system began on January 30. 

House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on South and Central Asia Chairman Bill Huizenga has said that recent elections in Bangladesh and Nepal present new opportunities for U.S. engagement in South Asia.

In his opening remarks at a subcommittee hearing titled “South Asia: U.S. Foreign Policy in the Region,” Huizenga described South and Central Asia as a dynamic region where young and growing populations are increasingly drawn to Western cultures and values rather than to what he called China’s “authoritarian alternative.”

Bordering India, both Nepal and Bangladesh are undergoing significant political transformations. Bangladesh held general elections on February 12, following the July 2024 revolution that led to the ouster of an authoritarian government in September 2025. Meanwhile, Nepal is set to hold democratic elections on March 5 after youth-led protests overthrew the previous government.

Huizenga said these developments mark “new chapters for engagement” in South Asia and provide an opportunity to redefine U.S. relations with the new governments.

Emphasizing the strategic importance of the region, he reiterated that South and Central Asia remain vital to U.S. foreign policy interests, particularly as their young populations shape the political and economic future of the region.

Here is the full-text of his speech: 

Our strategy there is key to the United States national security and economic strength and our global presence. South and Central Asia is home to nearly 2 billion people, dynamic economies and strategic waterways that shape the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.

 Throughout the region, the President has successfully negotiated deals that open markets and advance U.S. Economic interests. Now we are going to engage and how we engage will define America's role in Asia for decades to come.

 China has come to the same conclusion, no surprise. Through its belt and road initiative, China engages in predatory lending to further its security interests and force smaller nations into debt traps. Furthermore, China has hardened its border with India, Nepal, and Bhutan, building infrastructure to support its military aspirations.

 Despite its distance from our shores, maintaining a free and open Indian Ocean is a priority for our national and our economic security. The Indian Ocean is one of the busiest maritime corridors on the Earth, carrying the lifeblood of global commerce and energy, including more than 80% of global seaborne oil trade.

Safeguarding these sea lanes through enhanced naval cooperation with partners and allies will only serve to counter China's growing influence and limit its malign behavior in the region. Alongside President Trump, I too see the importance of our naval base on Diego Garcia in the middle of the Indian ocean. 

I echo this sentiment that preserving America's military fortitude in the region will deter Chinese coercion, prevent piracy, and ensure the free flow of American and world trade. Directly north of Diego Garcia, India, the largest democracy in the world and one of the fastest growing economies, remains a vital strategic partner. Just last week, President Trump brokered a historic trade deal with India, completely revamping US engagement with the country. The US-India trade deal sets India's tariff rate at 18%, one of the lowest regionally. Moreover, Delhi has agreed to buy more American energy. This deal will strengthen US-India relations, support American workers through manufacturing and joint technology ventures, and boost our exports.

Strengthening ties with New Delhi through defense cooperation, trade and technology partnerships advances our shared interests. I look forward to increasing cooperation, co-production and investment, especially under the new framework negotiated by the President. Bordering India, Nepal and Bangladesh are undergoing political transformations. 

Bangladesh will hold free elections tomorrow following its 2024 July revolution, which ousted an authoritarian government in September of 2025, Nepalese youth overthrew the government and Nepal will hold democratic elections next month. Both of these instances offer new chapters for engagement in South Asia, defining US relations with these new governments. South and Central Asia is a dynamic region, young growing populations are more often drawn to western cultures and values than to China's authoritarian alternative.

Strategic US led diplomacy will make a difference in building alliances and achieving our mutual beneficial goals throughout the region. Our strategy in South Asia must be comprehensive, anchored in strong partnerships, economic engagement, and a commitment to democratic values. Our engagement in the region must advance American interests, but also continue to contribute to a more secure, prosperous and free Indian Ocean. I look forward to hearing from Assistant Secretary Kapur regarding the administration's South and Central Asia strategy.