Submit your Article

Kathmandu, the federal capital of Nepal, has been ranked the world's most polluted city again.

According to the data of the Air Quality Index today, Kathmandu's overall AQI has reached 162 while Chiang Mai city of Thailand is in the second position and Medan of Indonesia has been identified as the world's third most polluted city.

According to the people concerned, air pollution is soaring in Kathmandu due to rising incidents of forest fire amidst the increasing temperature.

The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority, today, recorded 165 incidents of forest fire in 39 districts across the country.

According to wildfire expert Sundar Sharma, the increasing number of forest fires has contributed to air pollution in major cities of the country including the federal capital.  If there is no rainfall in the next few days, it will be challenging to contain the forest fire and reduce air pollution, according to him.

Meteorologist Govinda Jha said there are no chances of rainfall immediately despite a brief rain in some parts.

Disaster management expert Dr Dharma Raj Upreti said AQI from 0-50 is considered good for public health as it is indicated by a green signal while 51-100 is moderate and marked by yellow, but it still warns us to be careful on time.

It is unhealthy specifically for sensitive groups such as those who have respiratory and cardiac issues if measured from 101-150 and is highlighted by orange. 

Similarly, AQI from 151-200 is indicated by red to suggest that it is unhealthy for all, 201-300 is highlighted by purple and it is very unhealthy.  If it is measured 301-400, it is hazardous and 401-500 is highly hazardous and they are denoted by maroon.

Air Quality Management Action Plan for the Kathmandu Valley, 2076 BS considers the situation measuring AQI above 300 as a disaster.

China Foundation for Rural Development (CFRD), earlier known as China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation (CFPA) is the only active Chinese NGO working in Nepal. The NGO started its work in Nepal right after the earthquake of 2015 through an emergency response program. Shristi Kafle spoke with Zou Zhiqiang, director of the Nepal office of CFRD, on various aspects of poverty alleviation measures in Nepal.

Last month marked the ninth year of your organization working in Nepal. How is the experience so far?

When I first arrived in Nepal in 2015, I almost felt like it was my hometown. It was similar to any other Chinese provinces like Yunnan and Sichuan, just across the Himalayas. Before coming here, I worked in mainland China for 15 years and then in Ethiopia and Sudan. All those experiences helped me and my organization to start our journey. CFPA came to Nepal immediately after the devastating earthquake of April 2015. At least 28 people worked here in the beginning for relief and rehabilitation programs, while the international department worked together with the Nepali volunteers. Coincidentally, it was also the 60th year of establishment of diplomatic relations between Nepal and China. Besides immediate support, my job was to do research, planning and share proposals for long run support programs, as we realized that people needed us after the disaster. We didn’t work alone, but coordinated with the Chinese Embassy, over a dozen Chinese NGOs, the United Nations Nepal team, and other international donors. When the disaster emergency response team returned in June, it was only me who stayed back because there were many unfulfilled jobs. Gradually, we focused on other areas of work. There were rough roads too, but overall, with the support of our local partners and love of the general public, it has been a fulfilling experience so far. 

What are the major working areas of CFRD at the moment?

 After 2020, our major focus is on rural development. We changed from CFPA to CFRD. We work on health, education, drinking water and WASH, skill development of youth, women and microfinance, school meal and warm kits distribution, among others. We completed reconstruction of three school buildings destroyed by the earthquake in the Kathmandu valley. Last year, we focused our support to earthquake-affected communities in Jajarkot and Rukum West. Recently, we kicked off the first tea project in Nuwakot for value chain enhancement through Chinese machineries and equipment. We have continued serving nutritious meals to around 10,000 students in 52 schools of Dang, Kathmandu and Lalitpur. These are just a few activities. 

From 2015 to 2023, we have spent $10,350,000 in Nepal, and almost 650,000 people have benefited. As the biggest foundation of its type in China, we focus on agricultural industry development, creation of an internet platform to sell agro products and items to cities, tourist villages, and training the local farmers. All these programs were  successful in China. So we are blending these experiences in Nepal as well. 

How is the Chinese NGO different from other NGOs working in Nepal? 

As an NGO, we do not want people to be dependent upon us. Instead, we believe in providing skills and techniques to locals after which they can support themselves. I see that so many I/NGOs talk about rights, but care less about ground reality and livelihood. For instance, when we talk about women’s rights, it means women should be economically independent. We provide them with practical training, we want women to learn, and make money and live a confident and comfortable life. If they are engaged in any agricultural or skill related product, we provide them training on research, marketing, and how to brand their goods and sell at a higher price. For those who do not have any access to financial institutions, we have supported them with basic things like how to use and save money, and open bank accounts. We work closely with the community. I myself spend more than 120 days a year in the field. This is the major difference. We have partnered with over 20 Chinese donor institutions so far. Besides, we have come up with two books as guidelines for other Chinese NGOs who want to work in Nepal. CFRD doesn’t just work alone, we all want to work together to help more Nepali people.

How is the coordination with the local governments and agencies? What are the challenges?

I would say the major challenge here is geography, which is very uneven and even dangerous in some places. It’s easy to work around Kathmandu and other major cities, but to reach far flung areas, the transportation cost is high. And half a year, works are halted by monsoon and monsoon induced disasters. Besides geography and weather, the bureaucratic process is also difficult. Whenever we submit a proposal, it has to go through many channels, and most of our time is wasted just in waiting. The government keeps changing in Nepal, as do the officials in many departments. 

Sometimes, even a single permit could take three years. It’s comparatively getting better in recent times, as I feel the Social Welfare Council is working efficiently. In terms of working with the local governments, it’s quite easy as they are quick in response and management. Local government is more active than the center. Local representatives are from communities, so they come up with important proposals, which are related to the real needs of people, and the implementation part is satisfactory. But the central system is often changing. In terms of other partners, we worked with some 20 NGOS across the country, and we believe their capacity building is also important. So, we are also assisting in capacity building of local NGOs and staff.

You have visited many districts of Nepal. How do you find the living situation and poverty status of people outside Kathmandu? Is it similar to Chinese society?

I have visited at least 66 districts of Nepal, covering mountain, hill and Tarai region. Based on my experience of working in Nepal for nine years, I find that Nepal’s poverty status is better than China's. Decades ago, when I started work in this program, Chinese people were really poor. There was a lack of arable land and the weather was not favorable. There was a problem with the drinking water facility too. Resettlement was a huge challenge. In Nepal, I find comparatively a better situation. When someone has fertile land, and is provided with seeds, at least he will not sleep hungry. The problem in China was more serious. It’s a different kind of opportunity here. There are new concepts and ideas in agriculture and production, and immediately you can reap benefits out of something. This gives me hope. Last time, under the agro support project, we invited an expert team to conduct soil tests and water tests in some places, and found that everything was organic. In China, it would have been filled with chemicals. Thus, organic products in Nepal have a huge market, and they can be sold at higher rates. In Nepal, everyone has at least something to eat. People do not get nutritious food, enough meat or protein, but they do not sleep hungry. It should be counted as a blessing. 

What are the similarities between the Chinese and Nepali way of working for poverty alleviation and rural development?

Poverty is not just about food and housing, but it also incorporates many other components like safe drinking water, education, and basic health care. Thus, the poverty alleviation measure should be multi-dimensional. There should be a solid long-term strategy. Since 1989 till now, we have worked under the robust guidelines. In terms of the Chinese way of working, there is a strong collaboration from the top to the bottom. For instance, the east team of the country works together with the west team and share their experiences and expertise. There was also a provision that the officers needed to work in another province for three years in order to get their promotion. This is how the teams were mobilized to work in backward regions and at the grassroots level. Each country has its own distinctive national conditions, and the policies should be made accordingly. Nepal might have its own strategy, but it can definitely learn from Chinese anti-poverty experiences.

A recent audio clip referencing a Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court and implicating the chairpersons of Annapurna Media Network and Kantipur Media Group has caused significant controversy in Nepal, drawing widespread attention and debate.

In response to these events, the Supreme Court has taken action by summoning Yuvaraj Kandel, the publisher of sidhakura.com, along with Navin Dhungana, the executive editor of the website, to face accusations of contempt of court. This move is based on allegations that the website released ‘fake’ audiovisual news reports that defamed a sitting Supreme Court Justice, senior legal professionals, and various media figures.

The reports claimed that Justice Ananda Mohan Bhattarai, Chairperson of Annapurna Media Network Capt Rameshwar Thapa, and Chairperson of Kantipur Media Group Kailash Sirohiya, along with other notable figures such as Surendra Kafle, a special correspondent for the Annapurna Post, and senior advocates Hari Upreti and Kishor Bista, were involved in a secretive meeting. The reports suggested that this meeting’s purpose was to dismiss over 400 corruption cases.

Given the severity of the claims and their potential impact on public trust in the judiciary, the apex court has also directed Nepal Police to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter. The court’s actions underscore the importance of addressing false information that could harm public institutions and individuals’ reputations. It also sends a clear message about the seriousness of disseminating fake news that can damage the credibility of the judiciary. If such cases are not investigated rigorously, it could encourage the spread of similar misinformation, further eroding trust in public institutions and the media.

To prevent incidents like this from occurring in the future, it’s crucial that all branches of government—the executive, legislative, judiciary and media—operate effectively and independently. When each state organ performs its functions with integrity and without interference from others, the overall system becomes more robust and resistant to misinformation and corruption.

In a well-functioning system, the executive branch ensures that laws are implemented fairly and transparently, the legislative branch enacts clear and just legislation, and the judiciary interprets these laws impartially, upholding justice and the rule of law. This balance among the branches provides a framework in which truth and justice can prevail, reducing the risk of false reports or conspiracy theories gaining traction.

If the leadership in these branches upholds high standards of conduct and accountability, it creates an environment where trust can flourish. This trust, in turn, minimizes the chances of misleading information and corruption, causing chaos or undermining the credibility of key institutions.

When controversies or misconduct emerge involving members of any state organ, it is crucial that the leadership takes swift and decisive action. This demonstrates accountability and reinforces the principles of integrity and public trust. For instance, in the past, when Bishwonath Upadhyaya served as Chief Justice, there was a controversy involving Justice Har Govinda Singh Pradhan. Once it was proven that Justice Pradhan had engaged in misconduct, Chief Justice Upadhyaya responded by not assigning him any court cases, effectively relieving him of his judicial duties. This decisive action underscored the seriousness with which the judiciary addresses ethical breaches.

Similar principles should apply across all organs of the state. If an individual in the executive, legislative, or judiciary is proven guilty of misconduct or corruption, the leadership must take appropriate measures to ensure accountability. This could involve removing the individual from their duties, initiating disciplinary proceedings, or taking legal action as required by the severity of the misconduct.

By doing so, the leadership sets a standard of ethical behavior and sends a clear message that no one is above the law. It also helps restore public confidence in the system, assuring citizens that those in power are held to the same standards as everyone else. This approach fosters a culture of responsibility and deters others from engaging in unethical practices.

In my earlier op-ed, I argued that Nepal should aim to be a society where truth is revered and upheld in all facets of life. Unfortunately, it’s not uncommon for authorities to operate with near-total impunity, often infringing on both political and economic rights. This reality weakens the principle of justice, a principle that should be at the heart of governance.

To tackle this, we need a legal framework that fosters honesty and respect across the board. This involves not just creating new laws but also rigorously enforcing existing ones to ensure they serve the purpose of promoting truth and justice. When individuals spread false information or incite hatred, there should be tangible consequences, regardless of their rank or status. This standard should be applied equally to all, whether they’re ordinary citizens, influential politicians, high-ranking bureaucrats, or even members of the judiciary.

No one should be above the law. Anyone found guilty of disseminating falsehoods or engaging in hate speech must be held accountable and subjected to appropriate penalties. This kind of enforcement is essential for maintaining social harmony and ensuring that no one can manipulate public sentiment without facing repercussions.

In recent times, many state and constitutional organs in Nepal have faced criticism and controversy, struggling to maintain a positive image or deliver effective governance. However, one notable exception has been the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) under the leadership of Prem Kumar Rai. His tenure as chief commissioner of the CIAA has been marked by a distinct absence of controversy, and his long career in the bureaucracy had also demonstrated integrity and commitment to the public good.

Rai’s leadership style serves as a model for effective governance. He has managed to steer the CIAA with a clear focus on its core mission—to investigate and prevent the abuse of authority and corruption. This kind of leadership is precisely what other state and constitutional organs need to emulate if they are to regain public confidence and ensure the proper functioning of government.

To bring about meaningful reform and reduce controversies within state and constitutional organs, the effort must begin with politicians, who often play pivotal roles in shaping the direction of governance. Politicians have significant influence across all levels of government, and their actions can either promote integrity or foster corruption. If they are involved in unethical practices, it undermines the entire system and erodes public trust.

The author is a member of the Supreme Court Bar and has been practicing corporate law for around three decades. Views are personal

As I sat down to dine at the British parliament, I looked over a variety of dishes, each proudly symbolizing the best of British culture. From welcoming cocktails to chicken, pork to lamb, accompanied by refreshing locally crafted beer, every item on the menu boasted its origin from within the UK. The chicken hailed from the farms of Norfolk and Suffolk, while the turkey was sourced from Herefordshire. Even the bacon had its roots firmly planted in British soil, coming from pigs raised, slaughtered, and cured by a dedicated group of farmers primarily located in East Anglia and Southern England.

Recently, I had the privilege of visiting the British parliament with a few friends, eagerly anticipating a fine dining experience within its historic halls. Stepping into this esteemed institution, I felt as though a long-held dream had finally come to fruition. As an outsider, I’ve always been fascinated by the inner workings of this pillar of democracy, which serves as a shining example of a nation’s constitution and the embodiment of its laws, rights, and duties.

The visit was a scheduled affair, and the excitement was palpable as we looked forward to immersing ourselves in the heart of British governance. Despite a minor setback due to a colleague’s absence from our dinner reservation, the anticipation of experiencing parliamentary discourse and sampling British cuisine with a modern twist remained undiminished. The menu, though not extensive, catered to various dietary needs, showcasing meticulous engineering that represents the diversity of Great Britain’s culinary landscape.

Upon arrival, the grandeur of the architecture matched the gravity of the discussions within. Witnessing passionate debates among MPs on matters of national significance was both enlightening and inspiring. It served as a testament to the democratic process and the commitment of those entrusted with shaping the nation’s future.

During the visit, Harriet Neuman, a dedicated MP’s personal secretary, offered insight into the intricate rules and protocols governing parliamentary proceedings. Her detailed explanation shed light on the hierarchical structure and the meticulous recording of every aspect of parliamentary business.

Meanwhile, we encountered Captain James Robert Billingham, a retired army officer, who somehow was familiar with my social and charity endeavors. He mentioned that he had been following my efforts to promote food from every corner. In response, I attempted to redirect the conversation, emphasizing that momo, a traditional Nepali dish, represents just one facet of Nepal’s rich and diverse culinary heritage.

I highlighted the vastness and diversity of Nepali cuisine, suggesting that perhaps I should invite him to Nepal so he could witness and experience it firsthand. Upon his return, he could potentially serve as a goodwill ambassador for Nepal, sharing his experiences and promoting the country’s culinary richness.

Following the enriching parliamentary experience, we made our way to dinner, eager to indulge in the culinary delights awaiting us. The menu, a reflection of Britain’s culinary heritage, featured locally sourced, seasonal produce transformed into healthy and delicious dishes. The impeccable service added to the overall dining experience.

Like most foodies on the team, they offered or rather tasked me to order a meal with one condition: food must be shared. I ordered the soup of the day for everyone; it was not mentioned as actual soup – it was curried carrot soup. Curry is part of British culture. While ordering soup, I also heard stories about British heritage carrots. Carrots were introduced to Britain by the Flemings during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I and were grown mainly in Kent and Surrey. They were also worn as decoration in ladies’ hats.

I also ordered Char grilled English Asparagus with wild garlic, Severn, and Wye Smoked Salmon with horseradish cream, Prawn cocktail, another classic British dish, Pork belly, and of course Fish and Chips. Fish and Chips is like momo in Nepal. At every corner you will find these and you enjoy them with local craft beer batter. I love the tartar sauce, like our achar. What a lovely system serving a selection of warm bread with British butter. The British system knows how to spoil guests in a simple but very effective way. I also ordered green beans with roasted garlic, cauliflower with cheese, and boulangerie potato as a side, and ordered three desserts to share. I love champagne sorbet. In the end, all the plates were empty; the symbol of good food.

Joined by British, Indian, and Nepali friends, the evening at one of Britain’s most revered landmarks sparked conversations about empowering local youth and fostering economic and social growth. My focus remained on building bridges between my homeland, Nepal, and the UK, as well as the rest of the world, through the universal language of food.

As conversations flowed and laughter filled the air, surrounded by beloved friends and colleagues, the evening became an unforgettable memory. It was a perfect blend of intellectual inspiration and culinary pleasure, showcasing the richness of great British culture and hospitality.

Looking back, my visit to the House of Parliament and the subsequent dinner epitomized British tradition and hospitality. It was a journey that left a lasting impression, underscoring the importance of meaningful discourse and savoring life’s simple pleasures with loved ones.

While I was heading back home in London, a question kept nagging at me: Can the canteen of the Nepali parliament serve food produced in Nepal?

The author is a UK based R&D chef