Submit your Article

The most important day of Tihar, the festival of lights, is being marked today with sisters offering 'tika' to their brothers.

Sisters throughout the country offer 'tika' to their brothers wishing them happiness, long life and prosperity on the occasion of Bhai Tika. In return, the brothers pledged to protect their sisters from all kinds of adversities.

The auspicious hour for offering the 'tika' is 11:39 am this year.

It, however, can be held until sunset. On this day, brothers are seated at a specially anointed place around which a trail of mustard oil is drawn.

The sisters then offer the brothers 'tika' and garlands of 'Dubo' and 'Makhamali'. After placing colorful 'tika' on the foreheads of their brothers, sisters offer them a treat consisting of varieties of sweets, walnut, spices and 'Sel', a special kind of bread cooked in oil.

Brothers also offer their sisters 'tika' in return, wish them happiness and good luck, and give them presents.

The occasion commemorates a legendary event in which a sister has won a boon from 'Yama', the deity of death that her brother would not die until the mustard oil is dried up and the garland of 'Dubo' and 'Makhamali' faded.

The Bhaitika tradition is so strong in Nepali society that even those who have no brothers or sisters of their own receive tika from others whom they regard as brothers and sisters.  

Prime Minister Sushila Karki has asserted that the government is committed to conducting the upcoming House of Representatives election in a free and fair manner.

Addressing the ceremony of garlanding the statue of Shankhadhar Sakhwa and honouring the national luminary organized by the National Luminary Shankhadhar Sakhwa Foundation, Madhyapur Thimi today, PM Karki expressed her confidence that all political parties and all sectors of society would provide support and cooperation to the government in conducting a free and fair election.

"It is well known that the government was tasked with holding the House of Representatives elections on March 5, 2026. The government has the responsibility to serve the Nepali people by addressing the legitimate voices of the Gen-Z in accordance with the Constitution of Nepal. The government is committed to creating an environment where the Nepali people can exercise their voting rights without fear in order to strengthen democracy, achieve economic prosperity, and protect citizens' rights," she said on the occasion.

The PM expressed extreme sadness over the loss of young lives and injuries to hundreds of people during the movement led by Gen-Z on the 8th and 9th of September against rampant corruption in the country.

She expressed commitment that the process of indicating the Nepal Sambat on the notes issued by the Nepal Rastra Bank will be taken forward after consulting the relevant parties.

Prime Minister Karki stated that the government's decision to mention the Nepal Sambat in official documents clearly shows that the government is keen to promote, foster and practically implement this calendar. She instructed the relevant ministries to effectively implement the Nepal Sambat in government offices and also mentioned cooperating with the Foundation for monitoring the implementation of the Nepal Sambat calendar.

She expressed that the Nepal Sambat, which was started in the year 936 in recognition of Shankhadhar Sakhwa's unparalleled contribution to society and the country, as well as his great work for social justice, did not originate from the decree of a king or marking a victory in a war, but rather arose from the public level based on the sacrifice and philanthropy of a trader, making it a calendar of high importance and carrying with it the legacy of public welfare.

Highlighting the need to follow the path shown by Shankhadhar Sakhwa to eliminate poverty and inequality in Nepali society and raise the economic status of the people, Prime Minister Karki stated that only by prioritising national interest over individual and party interests, as Shankhadhar Sakhwa did, can our national aspirations be fulfilled.

At the program, she garlanded the statue of Sakhwa and also launched the bulletin published by the Foundation.

PM Karki also on the occasion honoured the cultural scholar Chhatra Bahadur Kayastha and Nepah Pasa Pucha, USA with the Shankhadhar Sirapa award.

The chairman of the Foundation, Gyanram Shrestha, the Mayor of Madhyapur Thimi Municipality, Surendra Shrestha, and former chairmen of the Foundation, Shyam Krishna Manandhar and Madan Krishna Shrestha, among others, emphasized that more study and research should be carried out on Shankhadhar Sakhwa, and the Nepal Sambat should be fully implemented.

In a significant move to forge political consensus and create a conducive environment for the upcoming national elections, Prime Minister Sushila Karki held extensive talks with leaders of major political parties at her official residence in Baluwatar.

 The meeting marks the first such formal dialogue hosted by PM Karki since she assumed office on September 12 with a clear mandate to hold elections within six months.

The discussions focused primarily on the prevailing political instability and security concerns, which many leaders believe could hinder the scheduled elections on March 5. 

While acknowledging the challenges, PM Karki reaffirmed the government’s firm commitment to holding elections on time, emphasizing the constitutional imperative and the people's right to vote.

“There is no alternative to timely elections,” PM Karki asserted. “The government is dedicated to conducting free, fair, and credible polls. Security agencies are working tirelessly to ensure a safe and secure environment.”

As part of her efforts to foster trust and transparency, Karki proposed a trilateral dialogue involving the government, representatives of Gen-Z movements, and major political parties to address outstanding issues and build consensus on the electoral process.

The Prime Minister also assured party leaders that the government is open to addressing concerns raised during the meeting, particularly around security, electoral logistics, and political participation.

Speaking after the meeting, senior Nepali Congress (NC) leader Prakash Sharan Mahat expressed reservations about the government’s preparedness, particularly regarding security arrangements.

“There is a serious lack of security for top leaders across party lines, and the morale of the security forces seems low,” Mahat said. “While the NC remains committed to participating in the elections, we are not convinced that the Ministry of Home Affairs is adequately prepared to ensure a secure and fair electoral process.”

Mahat stressed that most of the discussion centered on security concerns, which remain a key obstacle to confidence in the electoral timeline.

This latest round of dialogue comes after earlier efforts by President Ram Chandra Poudel to mediate between PM Karki and party leaders in the lead-up to the elections. With time running short, political consensus and enhanced security measures will be crucial to avoiding further delays.

Why did the Nepal Army (NA) not take the initiative to protect vital state installations such as the Parliament building, Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court, and the President’s Office? 

Since the violent GenZ protests of Sept 8–9, this question has reverberated from tea stalls to television studios, from ordinary citizens to political leaders and security analysts. And it is a question the Army will likely continue to face for generations.

 At a press conference on Oct 17, more than a month after the unrest, the NA said that Singha Durbar could have been saved only at the cost of significant human casualties, meaning it would have had to open fire on protesters. The Army, which has historically refrained from suppressing popular uprisings, maintained that the Sept 9 chaos was not a peaceful protest but a riot.

 According to Army officers, troops attempted to hold back demonstrators at Singha Durbar’s gates through physical restraint and warning fire. But as mobs surged in from all four directions, the Army acted under what it called the “principle of necessity,” prioritizing human lives over physical infrastructure. In essence, the NA decided not to kill civilians to protect government buildings.

Still, the Army claims it succeeded in safeguarding strategically vital assets. Despite the blaze at Singha Durbar, it says its personnel managed to protect sensitive documents and data servers belonging to the National Security Council, the Ministry of Defense, and the Ministry of Finance. Had those systems been destroyed, the state’s financial operations, such as salary payments, transactions, and accounting, could have ground to a halt within days, NA said.  The NA also claims credit for securing Tribhuvan International Airport during the unrest.

Initial media reports suggest that the NA has launched an internal investigation to identify deployment lapses that occurred on September 9 at sensitive and vital installations.

Inside the NA, there appears to be serious reflection underway regarding its failure to protect vital installations. However, publicly, the NA leadership is defending its actions on various grounds.

The questions confronting the Army today are not entirely new. Article 267 of Nepal’s Constitution designates the President as the Supreme Commander of the Army.

This has raised another sensitive issue: why did the Army not take measures to protect its own Commander-in-Chief, as President Ram Chandra Poudel reportedly had to seek temporary shelter elsewhere during the unrest? Public reaction on social media following the Army’s statement suggests deep skepticism. The common perception remains that soldiers stationed at key gates could have either convinced the protesters not to torch the buildings, or, if necessary, used limited force to defend them.

 Another question concerns the Army’s role in controlling the fires. Officials claimed that fire engines were dispatched to critical sites but were obstructed by protesters. According to the NA, by the following day, flames at most government buildings were under control, except at the Hilton Hotel. Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Rawat, however, stated in an interview that he had to rely on the Lalitpur Municipality’s help to extinguish the blaze at the Supreme Court on the third day of arson.

 The list of questions goes on: Why didn’t the Army provide backup to the Nepal Police in controlling the mobs? Why was there a delay in mobilizing the Army after Prime Minister Oli’s resignation?

 Despite criticism, the Army’s subsequent actions helped stabilize the country. After taking full command of security on Sept 9, the law-and-order situation improved dramatically. At a time when political parties faced public anger, the Army facilitated dialogue between President Poudel and the GenZ protesters. Political leaders across party lines have since praised the NA for helping steer the crisis toward a constitutional resolution.

 Yet controversy lingers over the Army’s decision to confiscate the mobile phones of top political leaders under its protection. Officials justified the move, saying unrestricted communication among party leaders could have derailed the delicate process of forming a new government and deepened the crisis. The phones were returned only after Sushila Karki was sworn in as Prime Minister. Although President Poudel reportedly sought verbal consent from major parties, their actual role in the government formation process was minimal.

Public suspicion toward the Army is not without historical precedent. After the 2001 royal massacre that claimed the lives of King Birendra and his family, the NA repeatedly asserted that security of the royal palace was beyond its jurisdiction. Yet many citizens never accepted that explanation. Even after 25 years, people still ask: why did the Army fail to protect its own supreme commander?

Similarly, when the monarchy was abolished by the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly in 2008, the Army chose to remain silent. Monarchists continue to question why it did not resist the removal of the King.

 This time, however, the stakes are far greater. The questions facing the Army today cut deeper, carrying long-term implications for civilian–military relations and the integrity of the state.

 Despite the wave of criticism, the NA deserves recognition for restoring order and refraining from political intervention at a volatile moment. Rumors of a military takeover or a royal return were rife, but the Army maintained its apolitical character and ultimately acted to safeguard the constitutional framework.

 Still, the questions directed at the NA cannot be answered by the Army alone. They also implicate Nepal’s political leadership and its constitutional arrangements. The coalition government of the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML had the authority to declare a state of emergency or mobilize the Army through the National Security Council, but did not.

 The new government that comes from the March 5 elections must treat these issues with seriousness and urgency. Lessons from the September crisis should inform legal and constitutional reforms to ensure such lapses never recur. What unfolded in Nepal was unprecedented, both in terms of scale and the symbolism it carries.

 Rather than dragging the Army into controversy, political leaders must confront their own failures. The events of Sept 8–9 were not just a breakdown of security; they were a test of Nepal’s entire state apparatus.