Submit your Article

The presumption of innocence is the greatest shield ever to have been provided to an accused in criminal lawsuits. It is a vital aspect of the criminal legal system around the world. It states that every accused is ‘innocent’ until proven guilty and the burden to prove their guilt lies with the prosecution i.e., the State. Whenever a person is arrested by the government for their alleged involvement in a crime, the government must collect all evidence to prove that person’s guilt in an independent, impartial, and competent court, beyond reasonable doubt. Until that happens, the arrested individual cannot be deemed to be a ‘criminal.’

The right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental constitutional right and it is protected in Article 20(5) of the Constitution. Similarly, Section 12 of the National Penal Code (Act), 2017 perpetuates the presumption of innocence in criminal lawsuits. 

This legal notion has become the standard of the ‘civilized’ legal system and it has enabled States to perpetuate their obligations to protect, promote and fulfill human rights of their citizens. The US case Coffin v. United States (1895) posited that the notion of presumption of innocence lied at the foundation of the administration of criminal law. Similarly, the case of Rabindra Bhattarai v His Majesty’s Government of Nepal, Nepal Law Magazine 2055 (BS), Decision Number 6622 meticulously iterated the essence of this presumption and held that no person shall be deemed as a criminal merely based on an accusation. Thus, it is undoubtedly an elementary legal principle that helps to protect a civilian’s freedoms. 

What would happen if an accused were deemed guilty until proven innocent? The accused would have to collect evidence of their innocence with limited resources available to them. On the other hand, the court would be ready to convict them merely based on accusations. Therefore, it would be unscientific and contrary to people’s human and legal rights. 

How should an accused be treated? Theoretically, they must be granted the same respect as that of unaccused individuals. Their fundamental rights must be protected by the State, and no person shall slander them or label them as ‘criminal’ until the court finds their guilt. But does society view such a person accordingly, with no biases at all? Does it comprehend easily that such a person is still a respected citizen and deserves no eccentric remarks until the court decides?

One of the best ways to assess the social psychology of Nepali society is to skim through various social media and observe the comments and remarks people express in various criminal matters. We can fairly observe that most people are quick to judge the accused and label them as ‘criminals’ based on rumors and whims influenced by news headlines and incomplete details from case files. It is as if an individual instantly becomes a criminal the moment they are accused of committing a crime. But does it happen if the accused is rich, influential, and admired by many?

The answer is generally ‘no’ and a recent example is how people (on social media) not only declared Sandeep Lamichhane (former captain of the Nepali cricket team) as innocent on a rape charge but also slandered the victim and perpetuated how ‘baseless’ the lawsuit was. To say that the entire nation was shocked would be an understatement. When he was released on bail in Jan 2023, a mass of people rushed to him to “celebrate” his release and many women were seen chanting his name as he left the court premises. What image of Nepali society does this “influence” paint? Why were people chanting his name knowing that the victim of rape was allegedly a minor? Why did they not think the cantillation of his name would directly attack the victim’s status and shake her belief in society and the justice system?

One of the answers to this is rape myth acceptance. RMA refers to acceptance of prejudicial, stereotyped, and distorted beliefs about rape, rape victims and rapists. These are the false attitudes and beliefs about the crime, yet widely held to serve and even justify male sexual aggression especially against women. When news of rape is broadcast, people in the first instance ask questions like “Why was the woman with the man?”; “Was she wearing revealing clothes?”; “Was she provocative?”; “Why did she not come for help sooner?”; “Why would a successful man risk his life and career?”

This attitude is not only prevalent in Nepal but also in countries all over the world. Due to RMA, many women tend to blame themselves and not bring the matter to light, let alone seek legal remedy. Patricia A. Resick in her journal article “The Psychological Impact of Rape” enumerated a wide range of problems faced by women such as fear, anxiety, PTSD, depression, sexual dysfunctions, issues with self-esteem, declined social adjustment and more. Yet many people in Nepali social media, in many instances, are quick to assassinate victims’ character. 

What could be the general ways to “fix” this attitude? Nepali society must understand that every accused has their fundamental rights intact until they are proven guilty by the court. Their rights to live with dignity, to freedom, to privacy, to health, to food, to housing and such, shall be respected. At the same time, if the accused is an influential personality, he or she shall not be celebrated or given a clean chit by the public. The people should let the law do its work and refrain from lionizing such individuals. They must think about the victim who is claiming that they were subjected to abhorrent injustice. 

To alleviate this attitude, the quickest short-term measure is to strengthen laws legislated to protect women. Courts play a crucial role in establishing and nourishing robust criminal jurisprudence in favor of women’s security and clarifying the idea of sexual consent. The more pragmatic the definition and boundaries of sexual crimes, the better social and legal understanding of sex crimes. This is also where strict monitoring of social media behavior comes into place. Nepal requires an upgrade in cyber laws to prevent online sexual misconducts. 

The best long-term measure would be to educate children from early ages to protect themselves, to call out for help in need, and to teach them the idea of consent. It would be beneficial if every workplace had a periodic mandatory anti-sexual harassment training to educate employees about respect and positive behavior. As time goes on, people must be cognizant about condemning lewd remarks on women through jokes, songs, and stereotypical narratives. If we could only adopt half of these measures, our society will be a safer place for women and girls. We could prevent numerous sex offenses and maintain a victim-centric attitude to make victims believe in social restoration. 

The author is student of BA LLB at Kathmandu School of Law

Is it possible for Nepal’s major communist parties to unite and establish a robust, unified communist entity? Leaders from the prominent leftist parties—CPN (Maoist Center), CPN-UML, and CPN (Unified Socialist)—acknowledge the allure of such a union, yet express doubts about its realization. They attribute this uncertainty mainly to the intricacies of power-sharing dynamics and the personal egos of senior figures.

In Nepal’s modern political history, a powerful communist party Nepal Communist Party (NCP) was formed in 2018 after the unification between CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center). However, the harmony among its top leaders—KP Sharma Oli, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, and Madhav Kumar Nepal—proved short-lived. The root cause of their discord lay in a struggle for control over both the party and the government. Despite initial attempts at reconciliation, subsequent alliances faltered, leading to renewed efforts on March 4 to pursue the vision of a unified communist front. While Dahal remains vocal about his commitment to this cause, UML adopts a cautious stance, refraining from labeling it as a communist alliance outright.

UML leaders suspect Dahal's motives, viewing his push for unity as a tactic to prolong his tenure and retain power under the guise of communist solidarity. Dahal, however, has clarified his intentions, stating that his aim was to unite leftist parties, not to secure the prime ministership. Following the formation of a new coalition, Dahal and Oli made concerted efforts to persuade CPN (Unified Socialist) leader Nepal to join, possibly even offering him the premiership after Dahal. However, tensions surfaced when Nepal's faction aligned with the Nepali Congress, causing a rift among the leaders to form the government in Sudurpaschim province. The fact that the three communist parties failed to field a common candidate for the upcoming by-election in Ilam-2 also suggests the lack of trust between them.   

On Monday, Oli clearly said that the unity among the communist parties could be detrimental to both the current government and the country. While he acknowledged the importance of unity, the UML chair was critical of the parties that claim to be leftist and align with the Nepali Congress. He was hinting at the CPN (Unified Socialist)-Nepali Congress alliance in Sudurpaschim. Oli cautioned against harboring the illusion of political strength through unification with such entities.

The notion of communist unity holds appeal mainly for second-rung leaders and they are actively seeking to realize it. They seem hopeful despite the apparent reluctance shown by the senior leaders. 

Leaders who have made communist unity their agenda say it will take some time for the parties to come together. According to one Maoist leader, unification between communist parties is inevitable.  

“To face up with the new political forces, there is no alternative for the communist parties to come together,” he says.

But Nepal’s communist parties have historically been plagued by factionalism and division. Theirs is a history of polarization and intragroup conflicts. As the murmurs grow regarding the unification among major communist parties, so too do whispers of an alliance between Congress and UML. Only time will tell if the leftist forces can set aside their differences and march as one towards a shared future.

An investment-friendly political and socio-economic environment is urgently needed in today’s Nepal. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and national private investors must be encouraged and supported by the friendly policies and programs of the Nepal government. Such policies and programs are necessary to increase the pace of economic development, achieve relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and create concrete economic grounds for graduation from the LDC status in the year 2026. There is a high potential and possibility for such an investment-friendly atmosphere in Nepal. The lack of political willpower, interest, honesty and clear-cut policies and implementation programs are preventing the creation of such an atmosphere.

FDI flow in S Asia

Nepal is in the sixth position in South Asia regarding FDI inflow, just above Bhutan, according to World Bank data for 2022. FDI inflow was just $65m in 2022 Nepal, which is a 0.15 FDI-GDP ratio. The Maldives is on the top, having $722m in 2022, and the FDI-GDP ratio is 11.7. India was second, and Bangladesh was fourth that year. Bangladesh had $3,480m with a 0.75 FDI-GDP ratio in 2022, whereas India had $49,355m with a 1.44 FDI-GDP ratio in the same year. The 2024 data show India received $105.23bn whereas China received just $70.23bn.

According to the same source, net FDI inflows to Nepal decreased by 4.9 percent to Rs 60bn in 2021-22. There is a significant gap between approved FDI and actual net FDI inflows in Nepal. Between 1995-96 and 2021-22, the total net FDI inflow stood at around 36.2 percent of total FDI approval. This is one of the weighty matters of concern for Nepal.

Vietnam and Cambodia

According to Vietnam’s Foreign Trade Agency, the country experienced a surge in FDI in January and February of 2024, recording an influx of over $4.29bn, marking a significant increase of 38.6 percent compared to the previous year. The major areas of FDI investment are Manufacturing, Services, Agriculture and Travel.

Cambodia’s FDI registered a growth of 12.1 percent of the country’s nominal GDP in Dec 2022, while it stood at 12.9 percent in the previous year. The significant areas of FDI investment in Cambodia are agro-processing, electronics/machinery, health, industrial parts, infrastructure and green energy.

Nepal’s failure

Some of the reasons behind Nepal’s failure to attract FDI are as follows:

Legal hurdles: Some Acts and Regulations responsible for this need to be immediately amended. For example, government itself has said Industrial Enterprise Act 2020, Foreign Investment and Technology Transfer Act 2019, Special Economic Zone Act 2016, Forest Act -2019, National Parks and Wildlife Protection Act 1973, Land Act 1964, Land Acquisition Act 1977, Environment Protection Act 2019, Electronic Transaction Act 2008, Civil Aviation Act 1959, Foreign Investment and Technology Transfer Regulation 2021 and Forest Regulation 2023 need to be revised. Also, some new Acts are needed to encourage the investors with mutual advantages and benefits with clear-cut policies from the point of license receiving to total facilities and support to be given and remittances (dividend) for return.

Bureaucratic hurdles: Bribery, corruption and red-tape are the main hurdles here. Whether national or foreign investors, this is their main complaint and grievance. Our legal and executive decisions and discipline should be such that they penalize and discourage the corrupt actors.

Political hurdle: We should be very fair and impartial, and it will be unfair to blame the bureaucrats alone. Our political circle is also tainted. Our politicians, bureaucrats and brokers have some kind of nexus through which they engage in corrupt practices and discourage investors. So, concerned government authorities and relevant agencies should pay attention here, and the culprits must be brought to justice.

Instability: Lack of political instability, marked by frequent changes in government, is one of the important reasons behind the failure to attract FDI in Nepal. Investors want political stability and policy consistency, and they hardly invest in politically-unstable countries. The political parties of Nepal must pay serious attention to this matter.

Facilities and taxation: FDI calls for a clear-cut taxation policy that is congenial to them and that provides information to them about facilities they are entitled to in a transparent manner. Our taxation policy should be distinctly clear and investment-friendly. We should provide them with all basic facilities that good plants and industries need. Why should we not offer them a special industrial zone like other countries by taking a cue from this saying: Facilities attract and invite capital and capitalists?

Trade union and exit plan: The FDI needs a transparent, solid, stable and investment-friendly labor policy. Foreign investors do not accept workers’ strikes and other forms of disturbances in the industries. They do not accept politics and politically-motivated activities within industrial areas. Does the government have a political will to address these concerns? Foreign investors are also very much concerned about their exit plans. They want to take their profit safely and smoothly back to their countries. They are also apprehensive about the principal amount they invest in. Our legal system, executive decisions and practices should be amicable and supportive of their exit plan.

Proposed areas: Our priority and proposed area must be clear and solid to attract FDI. As per the need and potential of Nepal, agriculture, tourism, hydro, connectivity, education, health, IT, and agro and forest-based industries are the appropriate areas for FDI investment in Nepal.

Learning lessons: In-depth studies are necessary to find the reasons behind Nepal’s failure to attract FDI. Serious studies of countries that have managed to bring in FDI big time, especially on the facilities and incentives they provide to foreign investors,  can show Nepal the way forward when it comes to attracting FDI. 

Conclusion

In conclusion, Nepal urgently requires a conducive environment for investment to accelerate economic growth and achieve SDGs. Legal, bureaucratic and political hurdles, along with instability and unclear policies, deter FDI inflows. To address this, Nepal must enact investor-friendly laws, combat corruption, ensure political stability, offer transparent taxation policies, provide facilities and address labor issues. Learning from successful FDI attractors like India, Bangladesh, Vietnam and Cambodia, Nepal should focus on sectors like agriculture, tourism, hydro, connectivity, education, health, IT and agroforestry, at a time when the country is gearing up to organize the Third Investment Summit.

India will go to polls this month to elect a government for the next five-years. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) is seeking a third consecutive victory under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi with a bigger and broader mandate this time. In a politically charged atmosphere, blame games among and between political parties are common. 

In a surprise entry, Prime Minister Modi raised the issue of Katchatheevu island, a past territorial dispute between India and Sri Lanka resolved in 1974 by the two governments through an understanding. For an Indian electorate, the border dispute with Pakistan and China has made more sense in raising a nationalistic mood in the past. Still, Katchatheevu is a political masterstroke by the BJP targeting the electorate in the state of Tamil Nadu who continue to feel the ire of the 1974 agreement. 

In a recent tweet, Prime Minister Modi took a dig at the opposition party, Indian National Congress (INC), accusing it of weakening India’s unity and interests by giving away Katchatheevu island to Sri Lanka in 1974. Whether ceding Katchatheevu was a shortsighted move by the then firebrand Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, under whose leadership India had defeated Pakistan in 1971, the BJP leaves no stone unturned in framing it as one aimed at political gains. 

The fishermen from both sides used to access an island called Katchatheevu in the narrow Palk Strait between Sri Lanka’s northern district of Jaffna and India’s southern state, Tamil Nadu, to dry their nets and replenishment activities. Historically, Katchatheevu fell under British rule in India and became a contested territory post-Indian independence. 

Following long-held negotiations and existing goodwill, the then Indian PM Gandhi and her Sri Lankan counterpart Sirimavo Bandaranaike signed an agreement in 1974 to demarcate the maritime boundary where Katchatheevu ceded to Sri Lanka. 

Considering the resource richness of the waters, Sri Lanka soon asserted its sovereign rights over the island and prevented Indian fishermen from accessing it. It was against India’s expectations that Sri Lanka would consider cultural and historical aspects and allow Indian fishermen to access the territory. 

Katchatheevu has raised regional sentiments in Tamil Nadu following the detention of 6,184 Indian fishermen and seizing of 1,175 fishing vessels in the last 20 years—as reported by Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar. He added that while previous governments ignored and used the issue for political purposes, BJP takes the fishermen’s issue seriously. 

By selecting BJP headquarters to hold a press conference on a foreign policy matter, Foreign Minister S Jaishankar kept the matter under political ambit. He avoided making it the position of the government of India. The Sri Lankan foreign minister has responded, saying Sri Lanka does not intend to entertain further discussions on the matter. 

With BJP expecting to sprout its political clout in Tamil Nadu in the forthcoming elections against powerful regional parties, including ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)—an ally of the Congress India National Developmental Inclusive Alliance—it finds Katchatheevu as a solid point to start its campaign. 

Away from the politics of Katchatheevu, small island and island countries are finding prominence in India’s geostrategic thinking today, especially after China’s expansionist entry into the Indo-Pacific. China’s presence in the regional waters became more prominent after Sri Lanka leased its Hambantota Port to China for 99 years. Also, with a China-friendly government in the Maldives, India needs allies to address the China challenge.   

Strategic consideration to find like-minded allies to counter China resulted in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue or QUAD—a diplomatic partnership between Australia, India, Japan and the United States, committing to supporting an open, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific that is inclusive and resilient. While China makes little in QUAD’s black and white, the unsaid understanding among the QUAD members is attempting to resolve the China challenge. 

In developing its capabilities, India’s ambitions as a naval power in the Indo-Pacific and beyond are visible from its assertion as a ‘responsible naval power’. Recent rescue missions by the Indian Navy concentrating on combating piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea have involved deploying guided missile cruisers, marine patrol aircraft and drones to monitor commercial shipping activity in the region.

In conclusion, by raising the Katchatheevu issue, the BJP may have increased the political temperature in Tamil Nadu, but it has not affected India’s relations with Sri Lanka. If something comes up from Sri Lanka, India knows it’s manageable, especially after Delhi rescues it from the economic crisis. However, India’s signaling of its rising naval aspirations, including maritime security in the Indo-Pacific and beyond, must be seen from a broader lens of Delhi’s changing strategic geography.