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. 

Article 94 of our Constitution states: Except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, no question or resolution shall be presented for decision in a meeting of either House of the Federal Parliament unless one-fourth of the total number of its members are present. For the members of our House of Representatives, the lower chamber of the bicameral Parliament, Aug 13 was just another day, so most of them chose to not attend the day’s meeting.

Subsequently, heeding to a request from a member of the HoR, the Speaker opted for a headcount and found only 66 members present in the 275-member chamber, short of the one-fourth of the total strength mentioned in the charter by three heads. If a request for a headcount had not come his way, would the Speaker have gone ahead with his proposal on deliberations over the Information Technology and Cybersecurity Bill?

Also, is it not the duty of the Speaker to scan the chamber, with or without a request, and see whether the required number of heads are present for discussions on matters at hand? What happened in the HoR on August 13 is nothing new, though. In the past, some big names have made their presence felt in national politics by remaining absent from HoR meetings for a record number of days. When even the stalwarts leading the nation a record number of times do not bother to ‘grace’  the parliament with their presence, there may not be much motivation for other ‘lawmakers’ to show up at the ‘talk shop’.

Also, even if the ‘lawmakers’ are physically present in the chamber, their minds appear elsewhere. A tampered Civil Service Bill making it through the chamber and reports about government plans to amend the law to legalize polygamy raise serious questions about the ‘lawmaking’ capabilities of our lawmakers.  

Besides, how many of our ‘lawmakers’ actually read draft laws, ponder over their short and long-term consequences for the country and the people, and suggest changes? How many of them opt for a vote of conscience rather than yielding to party whips? And how many even dare obstruct the House proceedings in the interest of the nation, rather than standing for powerful vested interests?

Arun Jaitley states: Parliament's job is to conduct discussions. But many a time, Parliament is used to ignoring issues, and in such situations, obstruction of Parliament is in the favour of democracy. Therefore, parliamentary obstruction is not undemocratic.

In the words of BR Ambedkar: However good a Constitution may be, if those who are implementing it are not good, it will prove to be bad. However bad a Constitution may be, if those implementing it are good, it will prove to be good. Wrapping up, the vivid image of a President paying his utmost respect to the Constitution during its promulgation in a very hard time comes to mind. Let this image frozen in time inspire our ‘lawmakers’ to take their duties as people’s representatives—and not as some overlords—more seriously. 

For a country hemmed between the world’s first and second most populous nations with giant carbon footprints, clean air is no less than a luxury. 

But it won’t be fair to blame the neighbors alone for a progressively worsening air pollution in the Kathmandu valley and other parts of our country, which still has a very nominal carbon footprint.

Article 30 of the Constitution of Nepal stipulates the right to a clean environment, stating that every citizen shall have the right to live in a clean and healthy environment. 

But that right is up in smoke like several other fundamental rights. With not much industrial base to boast of, vehicular emission is a major factor behind air pollution in the country, along with forest fires. During the sweltering summer that has just passed us by, the country hogged the headlines as numerous forest fires worsened air quality further and further even as the government did precious little to control the situation. 

Air quality has improved due to the rains, which, though, has brought another set of disasters in an ill-prepared and ill-governed country.

The wildfires are gone for now, but it’s not unusual to come across scenes that make one wonder if our roads were on fire. 

Every day, ill-maintained vehicles leave behind plumes of soot on our roads under the very nose of our extremely competent government, making a mockery of high emission standards it has set vis-a-vis vehicular emission.

Under the Paris Agreement, Nepal's Nationally Determined Contribution 3.0 aims for net-zero emissions by 2050, expanding clean energy to 15,000 MW by 2030, and 15 percent of energy from clean sources by 2030.

Despite green commitments to the international community and the domestic populace, the government continues to invest in infrastructure that is sure to increase the country’s dependence on dirty fuels. The country with enough hydropower potential to meet her domestic energy needs already has a cross-border pipeline (Motihari-Amhlekhgunj petroleum pipeline) with plans to extend it to Lothar (Chitwan) and then onto Kathmandu, and another cross-border petroleum pipeline (Siliguri-Charali petroleum) on the cards.

We export green energy and import dirty fuels. What can be more ironic?

When the rest of the world is switching to green transport alternatives like electric vehicles and hydrogen engines, the government is showing some clear signs of petroleum addiction, which will bleed the national economy further and further as petroleum imports account for a large chunk of our trade deficit.

It’s time the government did a course correction and shifted focus on developing green transport systems and an economy that does not ‘run’ on dirty fuels.   

In the life of an individual, graduation is a moment to cherish—forever. This holds true for a nation as well.

Come 2026 and Nepal is set to graduate from the club of Least Developed Countries (LDCs), a grouping of 44 countries from Africa (32), Asia (8), Caribbean (1) and Pacific (3), leaving behind its 54-year association with the club, as the club chair on her last legs.

Of the three criteria for graduation—gross national income (GNI) per capita, human assets index (HAI) and economic vulnerability index—Nepal has fallen a bit short of the first criteria but met the other two, becoming the first country to graduate without meeting the GNI criterion.

Let’s revisit Nepal’s scores against the three indices over the past decade.

In 2015, also the year of a massive Gorkha earthquake that left behind a trail of deaths and destruction, followed by a blockade, Nepal’s GDI per capita stood at a paltry $659 against the minimum threshold of $1248. In 2018, 2021 and 2024, its GDI stood at $745, $1027 and $1300 against the minimum thresholds of $1230, $1222 and $1306.

On the two other parameters, Nepal has consistently performed alright.

But, as they say, a miss is as good as a mile and this rings true on the GDI front, from 2015 to 2019 (the year of the Covid pandemic) and beyond.

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, while addressing the National Assembly recently, when the ‘hallowed’ hall was fully awake (most probably), read the upcoming graduation in an albeit different light. According to the chief executive, this shows that the implementation of (his vision) ‘Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali’  has begun yielding results.

What does this graduation mean for the country and the people? Per the PM, the improvement in the parameters in question and the upcoming graduation is an indication of Nepal heading toward self-reliance and a rising global profile of the country.

While the graduation indicates that Nepal has grown richer, how much of the riches have trickled down to the bottom rung over the years is an open question.

Analyses suggest that graduation means Nepal will no longer have easy access to cheaper international loans, that it will impact international support and assistance that Nepal has been enjoying, the number of scholarships for Nepali students will go down and that the country will have to strive harder for bringing in foreign investment, so on and so forth.

Here’s hoping that our government will be able to make the best of the opportunities that come with the graduation as well as some shocks that come with it.

Experts say that diplomacy comes handy in such situations.   

Indeed, as Eleanor Roosevelt says, the future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.