Submit your Article

The federal capital looks like the protest capital of Nepal, with protests of all sorts becoming a part and parcel of daily life. Just months after teachers and non-teaching staff of government schools launched a strident protest for the fulfillment of their ‘just demands’, teachers and principals of private schools have started hitting the streets of Kathmandu with their own set of demands.

The latest protest at Maitighar Mandala comes at a time when the Education, Health and Technology Committee of the House of Representatives is about to pass a Bill on school education.

Unveiling a phasewise protest, the protesters have warned that they will intensify their protest by shutting schools from Aug 25 if the government does not address their demands by then. So, what’s getting the protesters’ goat and pushing them onto the streets of Kathmandu from the classroom? Among the five points of objection, first and foremost is the bill’s intent to make private schools registered under the Company Act ‘nonprofit-oriented’. The removal of provisions on ‘full scholarship (the schools want to distribute scholarships on their own, but are okay with a transparent committee formed with the representation of concerned municipality/rural municipality distributing freeships), the end of the practice of schools supplying things not produced by them (uniform, educational materials, food, etc) and the removal of the rule allowing only students of community schools to enrol in CTEVT courses are among their major demands.

Apparently, the protesters have the backing of ‘umbrella organizations’ of schools such as PABSON, N-PABSON and HISSAN. In the wake of the recent protest, it will be worthwhile, once again, to revisit the preamble of our Constitution, which defines Nepal as an independent, indivisible, sovereign, secular, inclusive, democratic, socialism-oriented, federal democratic republican state.

The Bill may be one more half-hearted attempt of the government to gear toward socialism even as socialism remains an alien concept in different walks of our national life, including education. While the government should better regulate private educational institutions and try every bit to make education affordable for all by reigning in exorbitant fees and other charges (remember, right to education is a fundamental right), and make sure that only deserving candidates get freeships, robbing private schools of sources of profit may bleed them dry, causing the education system to collapse.

In the interest of students, parents and the society at large, the government and the protesters would do well to strive for a negotiated settlement. 

Ahead of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s expected visit to New Delhi, the long-standing border dispute between Nepal and India has resurfaced. The controversy follows the recent India-China agreement to resume trade through the Lipulek pass, a territory disputed between Nepal and India. In 2020, Nepal amended its constitution to incorporate Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limiyadhura within its official map. The government has formally objected to the India-China agreement, while India maintains that border trade through Lipulekh has been ongoing since 1954.

This development puts pressure on Prime Minister Oli, as political parties are urging him to raise the issue during his upcoming India visit. Leaders from the ruling Nepali Congress have already made public statements pressing PM Oli to act. Although both sides have previously agreed that boundary issues should be resolved through diplomatic talks, little progress has been made, and the dispute remains one of the most complex in bilateral relations. For now, China has not responded to Nepal’s objection. 

Meanwhile, Nepali Ambassador to China Krishna Prasad Oli met with Liu Jinson, director-general of the Department of Asian Affairs of Chinese Foreign Ministry. It is unclear whether two sides discussed this issue. The Chinese readout states that both sides had friendly and in-depth exchanges of views on China-Nepal relations and cooperation projects.  Interestingly, Oli will also travel to China later this month to attend the SCO meeting as an observer. Lawmakers have raised this issue in the Parliament, asking the government to take up this issue with New Delhi and Beijing. 

Meanwhile, India-China relations appear to be warming after both countries signed a series of agreements this week, a notable shift since the Galwan Valley clash in 2020. Western nations, particularly the US, are watching these regional dynamics closely, especially as US-China and India-U.S ties remain strained over trade and tariffs.

Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri visited Nepal recently to extend an official invitation to Prime Minister Oli for his India visit. During his stay, Misri met a wide range of political leaders and discussed bilateral issues. While it is now confirmed that Oli has accepted the invitation, the two governments have yet to finalize the date. 

Turning to domestic politics, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) have been boycotting Parliament, demanding a probe into the recent visa scam. However, the tables may be turning. 

The ruling coalition is preparing to impeach Deputy Speaker Indira Rana Magar over her alleged role in writing a letter to the American Embassy recommending visas. Observers see this move as a pressure tactic against the RSP, forcing the party to soften its stance. If the RSP refuses to compromise, its deputy speaker may face impeachment. A section of the Nepali Congress, led by Shekhar Koirala and Gagan Thapa, has criticized the ruling coalition’s move, calling it an abuse of the parliamentary majority.

Meanwhile, former President Bidya Devi Bhandari has refused to step back from active politics. She continues to insist that her party membership, held for forty years, cannot be revoked. Recently, she visited the party office in Biratnagar and met with supporters despite a directive banning such activity. She has now opened an office in Kathmandu to run her political work more systematically. Prime Minister Oli, however, has remained silent on her actions. Notably, in the party’s recent Central Committee meeting, leaders Surendra Pandey and Yubaraj Gyawali voiced their dissent against the decision to strip Bhandari of her membership, criticizing the leadership for avoiding the issue in official party documents.

On another front, teachers are once again on the streets after the government failed to fulfill its promises. The ruling coalition had pledged to pass the Education Bill to address their demands, but the legislation has stalled. With protests growing, the government faces increasing pressure to act quickly.

In the opposition camp, CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal continues to project himself as central to national politics. Speaking at a recent program, he claimed that even while in opposition he has shouldered the “sole responsibility” of national politics, warning that the country’s situation could deteriorate if he were to withdraw from that role.

In legal developments, the Supreme Court has issued a mandamus order to proceed with an investigation against Janata Samajbadi Party Chairman Upendra Yadav for his alleged involvement in the 2007 Gaur massacre. In that clash, 27 cadres of the then CPN (Maoist) were killed in violence with members of the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum Nepal. The ruling comes just weeks after Yadav exited the government, and he has since been sharply critical of the ruling coalition.

On the international stage, Nepal took an important step by ratifying the WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies. On Aug 18, WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala received Nepal’s instrument of acceptance from Ambassador Ram Prasad Subedi. Only three more ratifications are needed for the agreement to take effect. Okonjo-Iweala praised Nepal’s leadership, calling its move significant for both landlocked and least-developed countries.

In public health, the World Health Organization confirmed that Nepal has eliminated rubella as a public health problem. The achievement reflects years of immunization campaigns and strengthened disease surveillance. While rubella is usually mild in children, it can cause severe complications in pregnancy, making this milestone particularly important.

In technology, Communication and Information Technology Minister Prithvi Subba Gurung announced that 5G services will be launched in Kathmandu and Pokhara by January 2026. He added that the government is working to improve internet quality nationwide under the Digital Nepal initiative.

Finally, the Nepali Army and China’s People’s Liberation Army will hold the fifth edition of the Sagarmatha Friendship joint military exercise in Nepal from Sept 6. The 10-day exercise will focus on counter-terrorism, combat tactics, and disaster management, underscoring deepening military ties between the two neighbors.

India and China have emphasized the importance of maintaining peace and tranquility in the border areas as a foundation for strengthening their overall bilateral relationship. A statement issued after the 24th round of the Special Representatives’ Dialogue on the Boundary Question said that the two countries agreed to establish an expert group under the working mechanism for consultation and coordination on border issues. This group will explore “early harvest” measures in boundary delimitation in the disputed areas.

They also agreed to form a working group to improve border management and maintain stability along the frontier. Both sides will use existing diplomatic and military mechanisms to carry forward the process of border management and discuss steps toward de-escalation, starting with principles and modalities.

These agreements underscore efforts to normalize relations that had been severely strained since the Galwan Valley clash in 2020. If the peace-building measures move forward as planned, India-China ties could see significant improvement, creating new dynamics in the Indo-Pacific region.

 India and China decided to reopen border trade through three designated trading points, Lipulekh Pass, Shipki La Pass, and Nathu La Pass.   

Issuing a press statement, a spokesperson at Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the constitution of Nepal has already incorporated Nepal’s official map, which clearly establishes that Limpuyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani, located to the east of the Mahakali River, are integral parts of Nepal. The Nepal government has objected to any activities in the area, reminding both countries that the Kalapani region is an integral part of Nepal.

Similarly, India has said that its position on the matter is consistent and clear.  Border trade between India and China through Lipulekh pass commenced in 1954 and has been going on for decades. This trade had been disrupted in recent years due to Covid and other developments, and both sides have now agreed to resume it, India said in a statement.  As regards territorial claims, our position remains that such claims are neither justified nor based on historical facts and evidence. Any unilateral artificial enlargement of territorial claims is untenable, the statement issued by India reads.

In 2015, during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to China, two sides had agreed to hold negotiation on augmenting the list of traded commodities, and expand border trade Nathu La, Qiangla/Lipu-Lekh Pass and Shipki La. At that time, Nepal had protested the India-China agreement sending a protest letter to both countries.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is visiting China after six years to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin. India and China also discussed a wide range of issues linked to the BRICS Summit. BRICS nations are considering the creation of a common currency, a proposal that has drawn criticism from US President Donald Trump. India and China agreed to support each other in hosting major diplomatic events: India will host the 2026 BRICS Summit, while China will host in 2027. This provides new opportunities for bilateral and regional engagement.

The two sides also agreed to resume direct flight connectivity between the Chinese mainland and India, suspended during the Covid-19 pandemic and not restarted due to strained ties. They will also finalize an updated air service agreement. The Kailash Manasarovar Yatra has already resumed, and beginning next year, the scale of Indian pilgrimages is expected to increase.

In addition, both sides pledged to take concrete measures to facilitate trade and investment flows, jointly maintain peace in the border areas through friendly consultations, and uphold multilateralism. They agreed to enhance coordination on major international and regional issues, maintain a rules-based multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core, and promote a multipolar world that safeguards the interests of developing countries, according to the statement.

After the Doklam crisis, Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping held two informal summits—the first in Wuhan in April 2018, and the second in Chennai in Oct 2019—which significantly helped improve ties. In 2018, China had proposed a “two plus one” model, under which India and China would consult or cooperate on development projects in South Asian countries. That idea, however, faded amid worsening bilateral ties.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi noted that since the beginning of this year, bilateral relations have moved onto a path of steady development and the boundary situation has continued to stabilize. He added that China attaches great importance to Prime Minister Modi’s visit to attend the SCO Tianjin Summit and looks forward to India’s active contribution to its success.

As a democracy, Nepal has state apparatuses to address the concerns of its people. Hospitals exist to treat ills and courts are there to provide remedy with judicial pills. However, neither courts nor hospitals can cure all ills with perfect judicial or medical pills. 

Of late, people seem to place great trust either in hospitals for health and long life, or in courts for accessing justice. The rising number of public interest litigations (PILs) and writs show that public faith in the judiciary has grown over the years. This is a positive sign as the judiciary is counted as the resort for availing justice. 

However, this also tells us something interesting that people often turn to courts with litigation because of failure of other branches of the state—the legislature and the executive—to meet the expectations of the people or for their gross failure in upholding the constitutional values. 

PIL 

The PIL refers to a legal proceeding initiated in a court poor to protect or enforce the rights or interests of the public or a particular segment of society. Unlike typical lawsuits, a PIL is filed not for personal gain but to seek justice on behalf of the public. 

The petitioner is not dominus litis in PIL cases. The Supreme Court of Nepal has passed a plethora of judgments while considering PIL suits. It’s generally the relaxation of locus standi. 

Articles 133 and 144 of the Constitution of Nepal empower the Supreme Court (SC) and the High Courts with extraordinary jurisdiction to issue necessary orders and writs. The decisions passed under PILs have played a dynamic role in advancing significant social and legal reforms over the years.

The case of Advocate Radhey Shyam Adhikari v the Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers and Others (NKP 2048 BS, Vol 12, Decision Number 4430) is considered as the first PIL case in Nepal where the SC held that petitioners need to have meaningful relations and substantial interest in the subject matter to file a PIL.

In the landmark case of Surendra Raj Pandey v Speaker of Gandaki Province and Others (080-WO-1175), the SC invalidated the Speaker’s decision to uphold the confidence vote secured by Chief Minister Khag Raj Adhikari, who had claimed support from 30 MLAs in a 60-member House.

The petitioner contended that a majority requires the backing of more than half the total strength of the House—ie, at least 31 members in a 60-member assembly. The respondents argued that the Chief Minister had obtained a majority of the members present and voting, specifically 30 out of 59 MLAs. The court, however, held that a vote of confidence must command the support of the majority of the total membership of the House, not just those present and voting. As a result, the confidence motion was deemed invalid and was set aside through certiorari. 

In Hikmat Kumar Karki v Chief of the Province, Koshi Province, Biratnagar and Others (NKP 2081, Issue 10, Decision Number 11356), the SC held that a person holding the position of the Speaker cannot claim an additional or dual role as a Provincial Assembly member. The Speaker must remain limited to the role of Speaker. 

In Sher Bahadur Deuba and Others v the Office of the President and Others (077-WC-0071), the SC reinstated the House the President had dissolved on the recommendation of then KP Sharma Oli-led government.  

These are just a few representative cases where the apex court had to step in to uphold the constitutional values. These types of incidents have not occurred only in Nepal. India, too, has a long list of Supreme Court decisions correcting the injustices from the governments at the helm.

India’s case

The Supreme Court of India, by overruling its own decision in the State of Rajasthan v the Union of India (1977), held in the case of SR Bommai v Union of India (1994) that the presidential proclamation under Article 356 is subject to judicial review and that it is not an absolute but a conditional power and that no assembly can be dissolved before both the Houses of the Parliament ratify the proclamation. The imposition of Presidential rule and dissolution of the State Assembly cannot be done together, the SC further held.

The apex court in the case of Rameshwar Prasad v the State of Bihar (2006) held that the Governor has no power to decide the majority of the state legislative assembly. He is supposed to play a role in forming a government of a party or parties enjoying majority or confidence in the House and the deciding place for the matter is only the floor of the House, not the Raj Bhawan (Governor’s House).

Sabotaging constitutional values 

Against this backdrop, there appears an important question: Why can’t we build a culture that respects and upholds constitutional values? 

When government departments chase short-term benefits, and people are forced to challenge those decisions on constitutional grounds, it creates a climate where cases are filed against almost every governmental move. This leads to growing public distrust and a loss of faith in the government. 

Yet, the PIL should not turn into a tool to earn publicity; it should not become something like “Publicity/Private-Interest Litigation.” In essence, it should be a virtuous weapon in the hands of the weak.

The way forward

The PIL is an effective tool to lower the barriers and augment trust between judiciary and people. Its sole purpose is to uphold the rule of law and constitutional values. 

In a constitutional democracy, government actions should reflect moral values, constitutional rights and well-established principles. Introducing bills that promote bigamy or seek pardons for serious criminals will only lead to more PILs in the future—just like we have seen in the past. 

The authors are judicial officers at Morang district court, Biratnagar