Submit your Article

During Indian Minister for External Affair S Jaishankar’s Nepal visit last week, Nepal and India signed an agreement on implementing High Impact Community Development Projects (HICDPs) with new terms and an increased amount of grants. The two countries increased the fund size for the projects to Rs 200m. The fund size was previously capped at a maximum of Rs 50m per project.

Some political leaders have expressed displeasure over the deal, saying it goes against Nepal’s national interests. What does this agreement really mean for Nepal and is there any truth to what the critics are saying? Let’s find out.

What are small development projects ?

In the 2000s, India revisited its development projects mainly in the neighborhood. Indian policymakers realized the importance of community-driven development projects, so that they could be completed within the stipulated time frame. As a pilot project in South Asia, India first launched the projects in Nepal under the name of Small Development Projects (SDPs) which gradually expanded over time. The core concept of this program was ensuring a triangular partnership between communities, local governments and the Embassy of India in Kathmandu supporting small development projects. According to a study carried out by the Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), a New Delhi-based think tank, the idea is to link development projects with community and with local development efforts, and at the same time, ensure the role for local agencies. According to RIS, this program has evolved over the years and is now being extended by India in other neighboring countries like Afghanistan, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. The focus areas of the program are education, health, and cultural heritage, among others. In 2003, then Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa agreed to implement such projects in Nepal. 

What are HICDPs? 

This is a continuation of the  SDPs initiated in 2003 and it is an important portfolio of development partnership. According to the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu, these grassroots projects have been implemented in the priority sector of Nepal, such as hospitals, schools, colleges, drinking water facilities, sanitation, hydropower plant and embankment and river training works. According to a research conducted by the Center for Social Inclusion and Federalism, prior to Nepal’s transition to federalism, the district development committees used to send applications to the respective ministries, such as education and health, for aid. Those ministries would then forward the applications to the Finance Ministry. But in 2020, Nepal and India agreed to a new provision. According to Nepal government’s decision of 30th September 2020, to receive aid under the Indian Embassy’s SDPs, organizations are first required to submit a proposal to the respective local body, either municipality or rural municipality. 

How many projects have been completed so far? 

Since 2003, over 544 HICDPs have been undertaken by India. Of them, 480 projects have been completed and the remaining 59 projects are still ongoing. After Nepal adopted federalism structure with the promulgation of the 2015 constitution, Nepal and India worked on how to implement the projects. Province-wise, 84 projects have been completed in Koshi, 81 projects in Madhes, 105 in Bagmati, 61 in Gandaki, 60 projects in Lumbini, 14 in Karnlai and 41 in Sudurpaschim. 

Which other South Asian countries have implemented HICDPs? 

Other South Asian countries to implement HICDPs are Bangladesh, Bhutan and Afghanistan. In 2023, India doubled its high-impact community development projects in Bangladesh. The two countries had signed the initial agreement in 2005. In Bhutan, 392 projects have been completed under the program. India and Bhutan have formed a separate committee to implement HICDPs and they review the projects on a periodic basis. Similarly, India and Afghanistan expanded these projects in 2019. 

How are projects selected? 

The Ministry of Finance has stated that funding requests from local units are first filtered by the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD). The Finance Ministry receives project recommendations from the MoFALD, shortlists the projects on priority basis and requests the Indian government for funding. The respective rural municipality and municipality must also contribute counterpart funds of five percent and 10 percent, respectively. This provision, however, can be relaxed under special circumstances.

What is the application process for HICDPs ? 

According to the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu, to apply for HICDP funds, there is a specific format that must be followed along with submission of necessary documents, duly attested by the Nepal government agencies. The concerned local government must submit the proposal by disclosing project title, location, budget requirements and local government’s contribution, among others. 

Where are the projects implemented ? 

The CESIF research says, one could expect a higher concentration of project grants in the Tarai region bordering India. However, analysis shows India’s grants are relatively more concentrated in the northern districts bordering China than in the southern districts. Since 2019, India has funded in total 23 projects—18 education related, two health related, and three small infrastructure projects—in 26 districts bordering India, the research says. In the same period, India has funded 48 projects—23 education related, 18 health and sanitation related, two culture related and five small-scale infrastructure projects—in 15 northern districts bordering the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. 

What do the critics say about HICDP? 

Critics argue that HICDP grants India the opportunity for micromanagement, enabling the Indian Embassy to engage with local stakeholders. Political leaders are divided on the program. Senior leader of CPN (Unified Socialist) and former Prime Minister Jhalanath Khanal has vehemently opposed the decision to renew HICDP. He said that obtaining funds from foreign embassies for projects in Nepal is detrimental to the national interests of Nepal. “This goes against our independence and sovereignty. This is against our national interests,” Khanal told the media recently. CPN-UML leader Raghuji Panta also said that the agreement is against national interests. Speaking at the Parliamentary Committee for State Affairs and Good Governance, he warned that the HICDPs could lead to political meddling. He has also made a written request to Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal to reconsider the agreement, terming it a foreign interference in Nepal’s internal affairs.

What do the defenders say? 

Nepali Congress leader Bimalendra Nidhi has welcomed the agreement. He dismissed the claims that the projects are chosen solely at the discretion of the Indian Embassy. “The involvement and approval of the concerned ministries are a must to select the projects,” he said. “Various leaders and activists have already been soliciting development funds for their areas from Indian ambassadors and officials. Their opposition to the agreement now reveals their dual character.”

Indira IVF, recognized as India’s leading and reliable chain of IVF hospitals, manages a network of more than 120 specialized clinics across India. They have recently inaugurated their first international branch in Kathmandu, featuring advanced technology and skilled medical professionals. They aim to provide world-class facilities so that people in Nepal don’t have to travel abroad for fertility services. This initiative not only helps fulfill Nepalis’ parenthood aspirations but also aims to create opportunities and enhance skill development in Nepal.

Dr. Neha Homagain, 38, is a gynecologist, infertility expert and laparoscopic surgeon. She is currently the Center Head and Chief Fertility Specialist at Indira IVF based in Nepal. She is also among the few fertility experts recognized by the Nepal Medical Council. She trained at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York in the US, specializing in gynae oncology. Babita Shrestha from ApEx spoke to Homagain about her experience and roles at Indira IVF.

 How has global exposure enhanced your expertise in reproductive healthcare?

The training I had in gynae oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York was impactful. I was not only impressed by all the facilities but also realized the significant gap between oncology and fertility. It was an eye-opener to witness patient management, care standards, and the international level of healthcare provided there. Moreover, I saw the potential for medical tourism. Memorial Sloan Kettering is known for its advanced and top-notch medical facilities and I consider myself fortunate to have had that experience.

 What distinguishes Indira IVF’s approach and success?

At Indira IVF, we have world-class facilities that set the bar high. The reason for our extensive reach, with over 120 centers in India, is the top-notch approach and impressive success rate which stands at 75-80 percent. It’s because of their precision in everything from history-taking to ultrasonography and their cutting-edge labs. This IVF facility boasts the world’s best technology, like a ‘closed working chamber’ for egg fertilization. The eggs are fertilized in a closed chamber that replicates the human body conditions like temperature, carbon dioxide, pH, and oxygen, resulting in higher embryo and pregnancy quality. It’s remarkable.

 Also to prevent mix-up in egg and sperm handling, Indira IVF has combined technology and science by introducing the Risk Identification (RI) system. This system triggers an alarm if it detects any mismatched samples. This ensures that errors are practically non-existent. Another interesting aspect is the use of Artificial Intelligence. Our eyes can miss tiny details but, with AI, specialists at Indira IVF can pinpoint the best embryos and grade them, ensuring the best possible outcomes.

 What latest scientific breakthroughs and advancements in Assisted Reproductive Technology are in use at the Indira IVF?

Indira IVF is ahead in IVF technology. They’ve got the best services, experienced embryologists, and a big research team constantly rolling out the latest technology like the Closed Working Chamber, Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection  (ICSI), and Day Five embryo blast transfer. Speaking of embryos, there are two types, Day Three and Day Five and Indira IVF goes for Day Five due to its high success rate. They even use Laser Assisted Hatching, making tiny drills in the outer cells so that when the embryo is implanted, it can easily break out and attach to the uterus. Indira IVF is all about quality injections and has a 24/7 monitoring system.

 At Indira IVF, to address issues like a low egg count, egg problems, irregular ovulation, or instances where natural pregnancy is unlikely, we employ ICSI, a more advanced version of IVF. While IVF involves placing one egg amidst many sperm for self-fertilization, ICSI takes it up by injecting a single sperm directly into one egg. This technique is particularly beneficial in cases of male infertility with a low sperm count, enabling men to have their genetic offspring.

 In what ways does Indira IVF contribute to facilitating skill development in Nepal?

Through Indira Fertility Academic, a well-known fertility training center, over 400 embryologists have received training in India. For Nepal, this means that doctors or neurologists can undergo training at Indira IVF and return to contribute their expertise, bridging the manpower gap in the field in their country. 

How does Indira IVF make services accessible to a wide range of people?

Our price list is set to be inclusive, welcoming everyone from different economic backgrounds whether low-income or middle-class. Our services are not just affordable but also rooted in research, making them accessible to a wide range of people. And for those with lower incomes who might struggle with the costs, we offer discounts on various facilities.

What can be done if a couple has issues in conceiving?

If a couple, despite having unprotected sex, faces difficulty in conceiving, it’s important to acknowledge it as a potential infertility issue. The crucial first step is to consult a doctor because fertility issues can be complex and affect both partners. Seeking early medical advice can allow for simpler treatments, addressing hormonal imbalances or egg-related problems but delaying consultation might result in missed opportunities. 

In today’s context, modern technology provides empowerment, offering options like egg freezing. Since biological clocks and career plans aren’t always in sync, as a specialist, I recommend you freeze those eggs and sperm. When the time is right and you are with your partner of choice, you’re good to go for making healthy babies. Quality tends to drop with age, so it’s about being a step ahead.

Nepal’s ambitious roadmap to attain middle-income status by 2030 somehow weaves foreign aid into its development fabric. Emphasizing economic growth, the plan envisions foreign aid as a key driver for infrastructure development, industrialization and financial institutions for strengthening, fostering entrepreneurship and sustainable economic progress. Education and knowledge advancement, particularly for the youth, stand as vital focal points where foreign aid plays an important role in skill development and educational initiatives. Health services, agriculture and environmental conservation also feature prominently, with foreign aid contributing to healthcare facility enhancement, modernizing agriculture and promoting sustainable practices. As Nepal strives for middle-income status, foreign aid becomes not just a financial lifeline but a strategic partner, essential for nurturing resilience, growth and a sustainable future, depending upon transparent use and an unwavering commitment to national pride.

Effectively connecting foreign aid presents a nuanced challenge that involves both diplomacy and national strategy, particularly in a context like Nepal where such resources are relatively scarce. The utilization of foreign aid demands adept diplomatic skills to negotiate favorable terms and establish strategic partnerships. Moreover, aligning foreign assistance with a coherent national strategy is crucial for ensuring that aid is directed toward projects that address the country’s specific developmental needs. In a scenario where Nepal’s diplomatic presence might be comparatively modest, leveraging foreign aid becomes not just an economic necessity but a diplomatic imperative. A well-crafted national strategy, backed by diplomatic sensitivity, can amplify the impact of foreign aid, catalyzing sustainable development and bolstering the country’s position on the global stage.

“The giver’s hand is above the receiver’s hand” and, in the current context, this quote has relevance in both cultural and strategic terms. While traditionally emphasizing the virtue of generosity, in contemporary situations, it also implies a power dynamic and the strategic use of resources. In the modern context, individuals or entities possessing resources or leverage hold a superior position, and the act of giving becomes a strategic decision. 

Applying game theory, it suggests that those with the ability to provide assistance may use it strategically, aligning with their interests or objectives. The dynamics of giving and receiving, when viewed through the lens of strategic interaction, underscore the complexities and considerations involved in resource allocation and support.

In the sophisticated landscape of international relations, the individual representing Nepal on the receiving end of assistance assumes a role of profound significance. Navigating this role demands a delicate balance, where a strategic approach is crucial. It’s essential to avoid the downsides of extreme nationalism, opting instead for a measured and diplomatic conduct. This individual serves as a sharp negotiator, skillful at finding common ground without compromising Nepal’s interests. The art lies in fostering collaborative partnerships, showcasing the nation’s strengths and projecting a diplomatic image. Acting as a channel between Nepal and the international community requires intelligence in negotiations, a deep understanding of geopolitical dynamics and the ability to strategically advance the country’s interests without creating unnecessary friction on the global stage.

In the realm of game theory, the essence lies in the strategic interplay where the x-axis represents the pursuit of victories, and the y-axis signifies the tolerance for losses. Applying this concept to Nepal’s context, with its current standing on the y-axis, the nation already holds a position of relative vulnerability. The strategic imperative then becomes minimizing losses while navigating the complex international landscape. Nepal’s existing position may necessitate a strategy geared toward risk mitigation rather than aggressive victory-seeking. In situations where the odds of winning are uncertain, adopting a stance focused on limiting losses becomes pragmatic. Furthermore, given the pragmatic reality that countries extend help aligning with their own interests, crafting a strategy that involves tolerating minimal losses while securing support becomes paramount.

Indeed, expecting a level of support akin to the open-hearted generosity seen in the Satya Yuga may be unrealistic, especially in a world where personal gains often take precedence. In a scenario where self-interest governs many interactions, it becomes essential for Nepal, or any nation for that matter, to adopt a cautious approach. While acknowledging the potential for exploitation and recognizing the world’s pragmatic realities, Nepal should be strategic in its dealings. Prioritizing national interests, building alliances based on mutual benefit and being vigilant against exploitation are key components of a prudent strategy. The landscape of international relations often demands a realistic and measured approach, where expecting unwavering support without safeguarding one’s interests may prove to be a vulnerability. It’s a delicate balance between optimism and pragmatism, recognizing the potential for personal gain while striving to protect and advance one’s own national interests.

Now, as foreign aid continues to flow in for infrastructure development, it is imperative that the responsibility falls into the hands of the nation. The focus should shift toward using these funds judiciously for the nation’s own triumph, ensuring that the allocated resources genuinely benefit the citizens. In Nepal, where there may be concerns about a cultural tendency to misuse funds, it is high time for a shift in mindset. The emphasis should be on transforming the prevailing culture to one that values efficiency, accountability and sustainable development. The funds received should not only go into physical infrastructure but also contribute to a broader framework of development that aligns with the long-term interests of the nation. This shift requires not only policy changes but a comprehensive transformation in attitudes and practices, emphasizing optimal use of resources for the well-being and progress of the Nepali people.

In Nepal, the unfortunate reality persists that despite receiving aid, there is a risk of internal corruption, leading to a mismatch between expectations and actual outcomes. This challenging dynamic underscores the pressing need for systemic changes. While foreign aid is crucial for development, addressing internal issues such as corruption requires a comprehensive approach. It involves strengthening institutions, improving transparency and fostering a culture of accountability. Striking a balance between external support and internal governance reforms is essential to ensure that aid is utilized efficiently for the benefit of the nation and its people. Acknowledging and confronting the reality of corruption is a crucial step towards fostering genuine development and building trust in the effectiveness of aid utilization.

In conclusion, adopting a strategy that involves minimizing losses when receiving aid and strategically utilizing those resources for the nation’s own triumph can indeed yield positive outcomes. Nepal, faced with the challenge of corruption, should navigate this landscape with a keen focus on making smart decisions. By prioritizing efficient use of aid for tangible development, implementing rigorous oversight and fostering a culture of accountability, the nation can transform challenges into opportunities. While the road ahead may be demanding, the potential for positive impact through astute decision-making and resource utilization remains significant, paving the way for genuine development and progress.

The author is a student of economics at Patan Multiple Campus

Nepal is currently going through a host of political and social challenges. Major political parties are struggling to find a consensus as the National Assembly election nears, the long drawn-out transitional justice process is nowhere near complete, brain- and labor-drain continues, corruption cases are thriving and the people’s faith in political parties and state institutions is diminishing. In this context.  Kamal Dev Bhattarai, Akhanda Bhandari, Shambhu Kattel and Surendra Kafle talked to CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli on a wide range of issues, including the party’s Sankalpa Yatra (Resolution March) from Jhulaghat in the far west Nepal to Chiwabhanjang in the east. The  principal purpose of this march was to analyze the prevalent issues and challenges facing the mid-hill region and the country at large. Excerpts.  

The UML recently completed its Sankalpa Yatra, and you actively participated in the march. What was the purpose behind this initiative?

Our journey took us through the mid-hill region of Nepal, where our primary focus was to analyze the prevalent issues and challenges facing the region. Additionally, we aimed to explore the potential opportunities, identify obstacles hindering their realization and devise strategies to address them. The campaign also played a pivotal role in fostering stronger local relationships while simultaneously conveying our message on a national level.

What was the response of the people?

Contrary to the dissatisfaction often observed in urban areas, the people of the mid-hills exhibit a different perspective. Their narratives differ significantly from those residing in Kathmandu. The skepticism and aversion towards the political system prevalent in urban centers are not mirrored in rural areas. There seems to be a lack of inclination to embrace unfounded beliefs.

How do you assess the strength of the current political alliance?

Our primary objective is to secure a majority in the upcoming 2080 BS (2027) elections. Following the 2022 elections, we initially placed our trust in the Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, only to be disappointed by his dishonesty. Despite our proposal to Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba for a joint government, he opted for a minority government. In supporting the Shekhar Koirala faction with only eight seats in the Koshi Province, we witnessed the opportunistic nature of Nepali Congress, a party historically known for betrayal. Even the late Sushil Koirala had betrayed our trust. Our experiences with Dahal, Deuba, Koirala, and Kedar Karki have reinforced our perception of their honesty—or lack thereof.

You criticize the current government for ruining the country, yet you claim not to be attempting to change it. Isn't this contradictory?

While we acknowledge the detrimental impact of the current government on the nation, the reality is that we hold 80 seats and require 138 seats to form a new government. Changing the government is not solely within our control; various factors are at play. Our ability to bring about change is constrained by these factors. The current situation is exceptionally critical, with dissatisfaction evident in various aspects—social, economic, political, cultural, foreign, and environmental. Despite our vocal disapproval of the current government, the practical challenge lies in attaining the necessary 138 seats.

How confident are you about returning to power?

My personal interest in returning to power is minimal. Engaging in the political arena to save the government would likely be met with opposition. Those opposing forces would attempt to thwart my efforts, making governance challenging. My belief is that the resilience and patriotism of the Nepali people, demonstrated historically in their confrontation with the British forces using khukuri, will save this country.

You recently mentioned the issue of the ‘business of identity’. Could you elaborate on that?

Some people are running this ‘business of identity’, rooted in fostering hatred. It was initially instigated by the Maoists. But they are no longer openly claiming responsibility. However, they continue to be involved in this business through proxy forces. A meeting chaired by the prime minister takes the decision (to select the name of the province). Votes are cast accordingly. Later they say the decision should be reconsidered. How can such an individual govern the province? The conduct of the Koshi chief minister, who avoids mentioning ‘Koshi Province’, has raised questions about the Nepali Congress as well. Which forces is he trying to appease by not pronouncing the province’s name? How can such an individual govern the province?

But wasn’t it UML which supported his bid for the post of chief minister?

We supported his chief ministerial bid with the intention of promoting positive governance, not to engage in disruptive activities. We did not support him to disturb communal harmony.

Do you believe you made a mistake by supporting the chief minister of Koshi?

No, we do not consider it a mistake. The decision was made under unique circumstances. No party had a majority in the provincial assembly, and some forces were trying to stop us. We supported him as he promised to work in a positive way. However, he displayed dishonesty soon after taking office. His dishonest character became evident shortly after he secured a vote of confidence.

The developments in Koshi seem to parallel the situation at the center. UML supported someone to form the government, but you are not part of it. Was this a miscalculation on UML’s part?

It is not a significant issue, and we have not taken any benefit from it. The Nepali Congress has consistently demonstrated dishonesty on critical occasions. Deuba had minimal chances of becoming prime minister on his own. Other forces, including the Maoists, supported him to secure the position. Despite publicly committing to appoint Dahal as prime minister after the election, Deuba reneged on his promise.

Deuba avoided discussions with us. His plan was to stall the process until 5 pm, and make a claim for the prime minister’s position. But he was unlikely to get a vote of confidence. This would mean a midterm election. We supported Dahal to avoid that. Unfortunately, Dahal also failed to demonstrate honesty in his leadership.

Prime Minister Dahal, whose party has only 32 seats in parliament, has been claiming that his government will last for five years. What do you think is behind his confidence?

Dahal is in a seemingly ‘comfortable’ situation. Initially, we were not in favor of his leadership, and external forces did not actively support him in becoming prime minister. We supported him with the intention of steering national politics in the right direction, but he betrayed our trust. Forces that opposed the country’s development now have the upper hand. Dahal started becoming ‘comfortable’ for them.

Is there a possibility of left unity?

Left unity has already been evident, and that’s why UML stands as the most popular party. Certain forces cannot be termed ‘left’ based solely on their name. A party toeing the line of Nepali Congress and failing a leftist government with two-thirds majority cannot be considered leftist. A force growing comfortable with foreign influences cannot claim to be a leftist, nor patriotic.

‘Oli-phobia’ is the term assigned to those who do not agree with you. Why do you think foreign forces and senior party leaders fear you?

I leave the analysis of this ‘phobia’ to others. However, there must be a reason for it. It could be due to my unwavering stance on national interests. Another factor is my lack of personal greed; I prioritize only national interests. I anticipated my government’s failure when signing a transit treaty with China and understood that my stay in power would be challenged when publishing a new map, reclaiming land encroached upon by others. I strongly believe in maintaining friendly conduct with our neighbors. And I expect the same in return.

Will the UML contest the 2027 election independently?

Yes, we will contest the election independently.

What if the Maoists propose forming a coalition?

We will still contest independently.

Recently, there has been a rise in forces advocating for reinstatement of monarchy and the Hindu state. How does UML view these movements?

They are talking about religion but they have a criminal motive. Killings and bloodshed cannot be a religion. In the 21st century, it is inappropriate to advocate for a state favoring one religion over others. Nepal is a country for everyone. Regarding the monarchy, there is no substantial discussion warranted for its return, since it ended with the tragic massacre of King Birendra’s family. With no one from his dynasty remaining, the continuation of monarchy is not a viable consideration.

Top three leaders are meeting regularly these days. What is happening with the transitional justice issue?

The concern here is that those responsible for past atrocities are now positioned as ‘judges’. The individuals in power were once perpetrators, involved in acts of torture, oppression, bombing and openly taking claims for the death of 5,000 people. How can we expect impartial judgments from those with a history of perpetrating such actions? Individuals involved in past atrocities should not be in positions of power if we are to take the pace process to a logical conclusion. UML is for concluding the transitional justice process, but the prime minister and his party is causing the hindrance.

What are the stances of the Maoists and UML on ending the transitional justice process, and what are the contentious issues?

The Maoist party aims to conclude the process by neglecting the suffering of victims, whereas the UML is for concluding the process by prioritizing justice for the victims. The key issue lies in addressing the grievances of the victims, ending impunity, and establishing the truth before moving towards reconciliation.

Does this suggest a decrease in the chances of the transitional justice process reaching a resolution?

The resolution depends on the prime minister’s stance. While the UML is clear on its position, Prime Minister Dahal aims to conclude the process without adequately addressing the grievances of the victims. 

Several major scandals, such as gold smuggling, Lalita Niwas land grab and Bhutanese refugee scam surfaced but soon dissipated. Why is this happening?

Our initial plan was to probe gold smuggling by forming a three-member judicial commission. However, attempts were made to exert influence on the case, leading to the addition of another member. It is unlikely that this commission, shaped by external interference, will deliver justice as originally intended.

The management of Bhutanese refugees was a significant problem for Nepal. I held talks with US President Bush and Foreign Secretary Condoleeza Rice for resettlement of the refugees. In 2006, the US expressed commitment for the resettlement of refugees. After signing necessary agreements, we began sending the refugees to the US in 2008. The US agreed to accommodate 60,000 refugees and initiate necessary measures for the resettlement of the remaining others.

Some even suggested your involvement in these scams. What do you say?

Our role was limited while sending refugees to third countries. Those who sent other people in the guise of Bhutanese refugees should be made accountable. The accusations of involvement in wide-body aircraft purchase are baseless. We only released the last installment to the supplier on the basis of agreement reached by the previous government. It’s not that we raised the installment and pocketed money.

What about the UML’s involvement in Giribandhu Tea Estate?

Initially, the tea estate was allotted 51 bighas of land, followed by an additional 19 bighas on the second occasion. People involved allegedly pocketed commissions during this process. The anti-graft body advised the government that land allocation should only occur through the enactment of relevant laws. Consequently, we initiated the drafting of the necessary law and regulations. Once the law came into force, the process of land allocation ended altogether.

What about UML’s preparation for the National Assembly election?

We have fewer votes. Our success hinges on garnering support from others. Otherwise, we will not win.