Submit your Article

Over a decade ago, Nepal embarked on an earnest mission to fortify journalistic safety and uphold press freedom. A spirited endeavor sought to erect a comprehensive nationwide framework safeguarding the integrity and security of those entrusted with the mantle of holding power accountable. Yet, despite fervent determination and resolute global support, the realization of this noble undertaking remains tantalizingly elusive, emblematic of the chasm between aspiration and realization.

This chronicle finds its genesis in 2012, when Nepal’s vision coalesced into the framework for a journalists’ safety mechanism. Years of meticulous labor culminated in late 2019, with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the custodian of fundamental rights, promulgating protocols harmonized with the tenets of the Human Rights Act of 2012. However, the path from conceptualization to actualization has been punctuated with complexities and challenges.

Despite the concerted support of international organizations, lending their intellectual and financial weight, concrete advancement remains a chimera. Underpinning the stipulated guidelines was a triumvirate of mechanisms, conceived not only to shield journalists but to uphold the bedrock of unbridled expression.

At the epicenter of this vision stands a steering committee, envisaged as the linchpin of the entire edifice. Chaired by a distinguished NHRC member, this committee convenes stakeholders from diverse realms, including the Nepal Bar Association, the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, the Federation of Nepali Journalists, and the Nepal Police.

In 2021, the mantle of coordinating this pivotal committee was bestowed upon NHRC member Manoj Duwady. Yet, substantial progress remains an elusive quarry. Despite three meetings, the initiative languishes in its embryonic state. “Scarce resources, pivotal for the mechanism’s activation, are a critical constraint,” says Duwady.

Nestled within this overarching framework, the inception of a task force within NHRC was envisaged. However, an opaque veil shrouds the mechanics of these mechanisms, leaving stakeholders and the public grappling for clarity. Concurrently, the swift deployment of a rapid response unit, tasked with assuaging the predicaments of local-level journalists ensnared in challenges, remains more an abstract concept than a tangible reality. Regrettably, NHRC's vows remain stuck in the realm of verbal commitments, yet to materialize in the form of a functioning committee.

Laxman Datt Pant, a proponent of international media rights and chairperson of Media Action Nepal, leaves no room for equivocation in his censure of NHRC’s inertia. “The commission’s avowals to safeguard journalists and uphold the freedom of expression sound increasingly hollow,” he says. “Inaction not only corrodes the institution’s credibility but also underscores a palpable dearth of authentic commitment to the very ideals it professes.”

With a clarion call for action to supplant rhetoric, Pant implores NHRC to translate verbal declarations into palpable efforts, echoing the spirit of the ambitious UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity.

Having taken root in 2013, this initiative has garnered international solidarity, with prominent entities like UNESCO and stalwarts from the Nepal International Media Partnership providing vital technical counsel to NHRC.

In the face of NHRC’s assertions of constrained resources, a senior official acknowledges an intriguing absence of outreach to international channels for funding.

Ironically, despite multimillion-dollar investments by international entities, the journalist safety mechanism languishes in a state of inertia. Consequently, journalists grappling with danger at the grassroots level find themselves bereft of the prompt succor they direly require.

Bipul Pokhrel, the chairman of the Federation of Nepali Journalists, says that the operational blueprint of the steering committee remains an open question.

“Deliberations are underway to enhance the efficacy of these mechanisms,” he says. Emphasizing the imperative of inclusive stakeholder representation within the steering committee, Pokhrel underscores the significance of financial underpinning.

“With the mandate to safeguard journalists from tangible threats, financial support stands as a cornerstone. Thus, meticulous groundwork emerges as a decisive determinant in guiding the mechanism to realization.”

As Nepal’s chronicle spans over a decade, its odyssey to safeguard its journalistic guardians emerges as a narrative of soaring ideals tempered by intricate implementation. As stakeholders navigate this intricate terrain, the watchful gaze of the press, human rights advocates, and the global community remains riveted, poised for the transformative juncture when words transmute into resolute action.

The decision of the Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) to seek clarification over news published in Annapurna Post daily is an attack on freedom of speech and expression, experts have said. 

They are of the view that CAAN, a regulatory body of Nepal’s civil aviation sector, is not authorized to seek clarification on the issues related to news stories. Of late, Post and its sister publications had been publishing  a series of stories regarding the new rules of CAAN that are discouraging the aviation sector.  

Balkrishna Basnet, chairperson of Press Council Nepal, says it is the council’s jurisdiction to examine the authenticity of news, not CAAN’s. “The letter issued to Annapurna Media Network by CAAN seeking clarification about news stories is unacceptable to the media fraternity.”

There is a constitutional and legal provision enabling responses to media reports. If such responses are not published, individuals can lodge complaints with the Press Council Nepal. 

 “The Press Council will carefully examine and inquire into instances where the media’s published materials do not meet expectations,” says Basnet. 

Editorial freedom in media pertains to the autonomy of publishers in making decisions free from external interference. This encompasses editors’ independence to determine content and coverage. An integral facet of editorial independence is its role to act as a barrier against undue influence, be it from owners or external parties, when it comes to editorial choices and what gets published or broadcast. This becomes particularly relevant when media outlets publish content that may not align with advertisers’ preferences or owners’ viewpoints.

It is a well-known fact that Nepal’s geographical remoteness poses extreme challenges for accessing health services and transporting food. They have no choice but to rely on air services for these essential services. 

But CAAN has enforced a policy suspending air services in remote districts after 12 pm starting July 31. This decision has had serious repercussions in remote and mountainous regions of Nepal. Tragically, due to the absence of air services, four children in remote regions of Karnali province recently lost their lives. They could not get timely medical attention due to the new CAAN policy.

After Annapurna Post, a sister publication of ApEx, reported about the hardship faced by the people living in remote hinterlands of Nepal, the issue garnered significant attention. Media outlets, such as BBC, Kantipur, and Radio Nepal, also covered similar news stories, emphasizing the need for prompt government intervention to resume essential air services in remote regions of the country.

Despite appeals from the chief minister of Karnali province, the federal minister of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation, political leaders, and local representatives, CAAN Director General Pradeep Adhikari decided not to lift the air service restrictions. Instead, the CAAN decided to go against the media for exposing his misguided and callous decision.

The clarification letter states that AMN has repeatedly disseminated news, analyses, and comments that gravely undermine flight safety. The letter further points out that despite Capt Thapa’s role as the head of an airline company responsible for upholding flight safety, he seems to have misused his publishing rights through his media outlet, engaging in misleading and rumor-spreading activities. 

Senior advocate Bijay Gupta says that the news covered by the Annapurna Post was about the effects of flight suspension. “It’s what the media should do.”

These actions, as stated in the letter, conflict with the Nepal Civil Aviation Authority Act of 2053 BS and the associated regulations, requirements, manuals, and other standards outlined by the authority.

But experts maintain that while CAAN has the capacity to regulate airspace, it has no right to encroach on editorial freedom.

Bipul Pokharel, president of Federation of Nepalese Journalists, emphasizes that the media conveys information in alignment with their principles, benefiting from editorial independence and direction. “Individuals without relevant involvement should not become the focus of clarification or measures based on edited content,” he adds.

Clause (b) of section 7 in the Press Council Act of 2048 BS stipulates that the journalist code of conduct of 2073 BS, endorsed by the Federation of Nepalese Journalists, emphasizes the importance of upholding editorial freedom. According to this provision, the code establishes that editors bear ultimate responsibility and control over news collection, editing, production, presentation, and distribution. Aligned with the global principle of editorial independence, the code underscores that media outlets and journalists must have the freedom to gather, publish, and express information, opinions, and perspectives without external pressure or influence.

As pointed out by legal experts, Capt Thapa holds leadership roles within three distinct organizations, each governed by separate laws. Hence, it is inappropriate for CAAN to conflate Thapa’s roles and seek an explanation for news published in his newspaper while linking it to his involvement with Simrik Air. Capt Thapa’s roles in Simrik and Annapurna are separate, and experts believe that CAAN Director General Adhikari has committed a constitutional and legal misstep.

The authority to write and publish news and editorials rests with editors, not investors. If dissatisfied with news coverage, individuals or organizations concerned should approach the relevant journalist or editor to present a rebuttal, or file a complaint with the Press Council Nepal.

Simrik Air functions as a separate company. “In accordance with the Companies Act of 2063, individuals are legally permitted to establish a company to achieve objectives specified in the memorandum of association, either independently or collectively,” says senior lawyer Jagadish Dahal. Pursuant to the Companies Act, Capt Thapa assumed the position of chair for Simrik Air, he says that there is another distinct law that governs the selection of the Airline Operators Association's president. 

“As CAAN DG Adhikari has committed a series of unconstitutional moves, he should step down from the post on an ethical ground,” says Dahal. “According to the Publication and Printing Act, Capt Thapa undertook the role of the AMN chair as a mere investor, meaning he does not exert editorial control over published content.” 

Dahal adds CAAN cannot address the chairperson of different organizations in the same way, though the individual may be the same. “There is no legal provision for CAAN to interfere.”

The FNJ has also warned the Civil Aviation Authority to immediately withdraw the clarification sought over the news published in the Annapurna Post daily. The FNJ concluded that asking for clarification in an illegal way is objectionable and against the constitutional concept of press freedom, reads a letter issued by FNJ General Secretary Roshan Puri on Aug 21.

The federation has also warned the CAAN to withdraw the clarification asked in an illegal way by respecting the constitutionally-guaranteed rights to expression and press freedom.

For several years, physical infrastructure development has moved to Nepal’s policy agenda due to its higher economic and social multiplier effect in addressing development challenges. Globally, the development of transport, electricity, and telecommunications infrastructure is found to have a significant positive impact on Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Intriguingly, growth impacts are higher in developing countries compared to developed countries. However, infrastructure development in Nepal has primarily remained a political rhetoric, and poor infrastructure governance sharply contrasts with the country’s target to achieve middle-income status by 2030. This juxtaposition between aspiration and infrastructure deficit calls for a paradigm shift—where infrastructure development is intrinsically intertwined with evidence-based growth policies for economic takeoff.

Development backlog

Nepal remains one of the world’s least urbanized yet rapidly urbanizing countries, which means an ever-increasing demand for road, energy, and ICT infrastructure. According to the World Bank, Nepal must invest 10-15 percent of its annual GDP until 2030 to maintain present GDP growth. But statistics present a glaring disparity in road density, ICT, energy reliability, and consumption infrastructure.

From 2011 till 2018, Nepal’s strategic road network increased from 11,636 kilometers to 13,447 km, a mere increase of 2000 km in six years. Notably, the 15th periodic plan has set an ambitious target to expand national highways above two lanes to 3,000 km by 2043/44. Presently, road connectivity is poor, and it has significantly discouraged international trade and FDI, inflated transportation costs, and limited economic and public services access. Studies also indicate a bi-directional causality between road infrastructure and economic growth, complementing each other.

Also, we are confronted with a paradox when we assess Nepal’s ICT infrastructure. On the one hand, mobile phone penetration has surged to an impressive 130 percent, painting a picture of connectivity on the rise. On the other, Nepal’s position in the Network Readiness Index is 112 out of 131 economies, signaling a shortfall in digital connectivity, technology access, and overall readiness of the economy and society to benefit from digital advancement. 

Despite initiatives like the Digital Nepal Framework, the development and use of ICT infrastructure in easing and economizing business and public service delivery remains far from satisfactory. A vast digital divide persists in terms of availability, accessibility, and reliability, given the current state of digital infrastructure.

Unlike road and ICT, the energy landscape has improved with electricity access to 89.9 percent of the population after development of new hydropower projects. But poor distribution networks remain a bottleneck resulting in intermittent power outages and energy shortages. Furthermore, World Bank statistics reveal Nepal’s energy consumption is meager 144 kWh per capita, which is significantly lower even by the South Asian benchmark of 694 kWh per capita. As a result, only 35 percent of the total population has access to clean fuels and technology for cooking. A juggernaut task, therefore, is twin-sided, i.e., not just enhancing distribution infrastructure but also ensuring higher consumption driven by increased access to clean technologies for household use.  

Developmental challenges

Nepal’s policy discussions have often centered around the availability of financial resources for infrastructure projects. While it’s a fact that Nepal faces a financial shortage when it comes to executing massive projects, the crux of the infrastructure deficit lies in the nation's poor infrastructure governance. Over time, Nepal’s projects have been subject to political influence, often bypassing rigorous and systematic approaches during the ideation and preparation phases. The lack of due diligence and institutional capacity raises concerns about a project’s credibility, leaving investors skeptical about its bankability and potential return on investment. Numerous projects have eventually transformed into ‘white elephants’ or encountered time and cost overruns, including prominent projects like the airports in Pokhara and Bhairahawa, along with the Kathmandu-Tarai Fast Track.

Additionally, Nepal’s rugged terrain is compounding these challenges, which demands substantial financial and technical resources for developing large-scale infrastructure projects—resources that Nepal currently lacks. Collaborations with neighboring countries for project development also face additional challenges on geopolitical fronts, further complicated by political dynamics. In the face of such hurdles, a resource-constrained economy like Nepal’s finds the realization of projects increasingly daunting, and poor infrastructure development remains a constant reminder of these barriers.

An engine for growth

The impact of infrastructure remains different given a country’s level of development and economic structure. Due to the multiplier effect, developing physical infrastructure in African countries was associated with 1.3 percent higher economic growth than in Southeast Asian countries. Although Nepal lacks adequate research on the economic impact of infrastructure, its impact has been witnessed in terms of improved living standards after access to such infrastructure. For instance, despite poor digital infrastructure, the ICT sector generated more than 66, 000 jobs, contributed 1.4 percent to GDP, and 5.5 percent in foreign earnings. Given Nepal’s poor development indicators, such a high multiplier effect is certain through road and energy infrastructure. 

Furthermore, Nepal must refer to striking economic differences between Latin America and Southeast Asia, where the unavailability/inadequacy of physical infrastructure slowed growth by 1-3 percent in the long run. Furthermore, it led to a noticeable one-third disparity in output per worker compared to their Southeast Asian counterparts. Such insights remain vital for Nepal to enhance business competitiveness and bolster economic growth. The tangible impacts are more evident as infrastructure leads to positive spillover on local market creation, increased employment opportunities, and improved peoples’ livelihoods.

Aspiration to transformation

With increasing growth aspirations, Nepal's demand for infrastructure shall mount, creating an uneasy situation for policy stakeholders. But the central question is how the government will ensure sound infrastructure governance and strategically interlink with economic growth and development. Findings from the McKinsey report estimate 15-35 percent of the project cost can be reduced with improvement in infrastructure governance. In Nepal’s context, it is essential that the government distance itself from investing in ambiguous projects failing to demonstrate long-term socio-economic benefits. Secondly, sufficient investment should be made in project identification, preparation, and structuring to streamline service delivery. 

Lastly, policy should equally focus on extracting maximum benefit from existing infrastructure through upgradation to break Nepal’s poor infrastructure-economic backwardness trap. In a nutshell, neglecting the development of power, transport and telecommunications infrastructure at this critical juncture risks putting Nepal on an irreversible path of regression by taking a toll on GDP.  

The author is currently a public policy candidate at Willy Brandt School in Germany. He has served as a research officer at the Investment Board Nepal

Agriculture has long been the backbone of Nepal’s economy and a source of livelihood for a majority of its population. We have grown up knowing, studying, writing about Nepal and agriculture in Nepal, described in textbooks as an “agricultural country”. But looking at the uncultivated paddy fields and barren lands, I wonder where the agriculture sector and future of farmers is going. With the advent of agriculture 2.0, a revolutionary paradigm shift is taking place, transforming traditional farming practices into modern, technology-driven approaches. This evolution not only promises to enhance productivity and sustainability but also holds the potential to uplift rural communities, ensuring food security and economic growth for the whole nation. In the context of Nepal, Agriculture 2.0 is poised to bring about a new era of prosperity for its farmers and the agriculture sector as a whole.

Agriculture 2.0, often referred to as “smart farming” or precision agriculture, integrates advanced technologies such as the Internet of Things (IOT), artificial intelligence (AI), data analytics and automation into traditional agricultural practices. This approach allows for real-time monitoring, data-driven decision making, and the optimization of resources like water, fertilizers, and pesticides. In the context of Nepal, where smallholder farmers dominate, adopting Agriculture 2.0 practices can significantly enhance their productivity while also conserving resources.

Nepal faces several challenges in its agriculture sector, including fragmented land holdings, limited access to modern agriculture techniques, unpredictable weather patterns, and the ongoing effects of climate change. These challenges have hampered productivity, leading to low income levels among farmers and contributing to rural-urban migration. Agriculture 2.0 offers innovative solutions that can address these issues by enabling farmers to make informed decisions, mitigate risks, and achieve better yields.

It’s already the end of Shrawan, but some farmers haven’t planted paddy still due to a late entry of monsoon and their dependence on rainfed farming and lack of year-round irrigation facilities. Monsoon normally enters Nepal on June 10 and its withdrawal occurs on September 23. Due to climate change, every year the temperature rises by 0.06 C in Nepal and the monsoon gets delayed. Monsoon enters from eastern Nepal and progresses slowly toward western parts. It reaches Karnali and Sudurpaschim provinces very late. Delayed planting of paddy is one of the reasons for low productivity of rice. Late plantation and harvesting also affects the plantation of subsequent crops, mostly wheat. Delayed wheat planting then declines the yield of wheat. In this way, the whole annual cycle of cropping is affected due to late paddy plantation. 

Nepal has a food deficit problem that is most acute in the mountain and hill districts with annual food shortage for six months or more. The situation could become worse unless agricultural productivity and rural economies are transformed. Adoption of intensive farming throughout the country along with appropriate technological innovation offers promise for such a transformation. It's high time we adopted climate-smart agriculture practices. Some practices that should be adopted are listed below:

Replacing puddled transplanted rice with DSR( direct seeded rice) so that farmers don’t have to wait until monsoon to start planting. DSR can enable farmers of western Nepal to early plant and harvest paddy and increase national rice yield if weed management can be done effectively during the early growing period.

• Rather than expending time, energy, and money on land preparation after rice harvest for wheat plantation, it’s time to guide farmers for the adoption of surface seeding of wheat. It ensures early planting and thus increases wheat production.
• Agroforestry i.e. incorporating multi-use trees with compatible crops like cardamom under uttis, tea under siris, amriso under uttis, ginger and banana under terraces.
• Intercropping and mixed cropping with legumes (soyabean, blackgram, horsegram, pea) and nitrogen-fixing crops (clover and legumes) i.e. maize + soyabean and barley in upland irrigated mid-Hills of Nepal.
• Use of bio fertilizers like Azospirulum (A. lipoferum for Rice and Maize),  Rhizobium, Azolla , Blue green algae
• Use of green manuring crops like dhaincha, sun hemp, cowpea, berseem, siris, titepati, asuro and khirro. It increases the soil organic matter and cuts the fertilizer amount to some extent.
• Use of machinery like zero-till drill, seed cum fertilizer drill, multiple nozzle boom, turbo happy seeder, laser land leveler, conary and rotary weeder. Farmers can own subsidized machinery through farmers’ groups or cooperatives.

Agriculture 2.0 has the potential to revolutionize Nepal’s agriculture landscape, ushering in a new era of productivity, sustainability, and prosperity for its farming communities. Relevant government and non-government agencies should focus on climate-smart agriculture and provide trainings, build infrastructure, establish agriculture service centers and work on capacity building of farmers in improved, climate-resilient agriculture technologies in order to uplift the livelihood of farmers, ensure food security, strengthen the national economy, ultimately leading to a brighter and more resilient future for Nepal’s agricultural sector.