Submit your Article

Conflicts of Interest (CoI) pose significant challenges to governance in Nepal, as personal affiliations and political influences often undermine public decision-making. Notable cases such as Rabi Lamichhane’s alleged misuse of cooperative funds and Min Bahadur Gurung’s controversial land donation to the UML Party highlight how private interests can affect public service. Other scandals, including the Lalita Niwas (Baluwatar) case and the Bhutanese refugee scam, illustrate how systemic CoI and favoritism can lead to the misuse of public resources under seemingly legitimate policies. To effectively address CoI in Nepal, it is essential to go beyond legal solutions; we need to understand the cultural, social and ethical contexts that influence these issues. This article examines the impact of CoI on governance in Nepal, reviews existing legal frameworks and proposes a comprehensive action plan that encompasses both legal and cultural dimensions.

CoI in governance

CoI occurs when the personal interests of public officials interfere with their responsibilities, leading to a loss of public trust. CoI can be classified as real, where there is a direct personal gain, or perceived, where the appearance of bias is present. For example, if a business owner donates to a political party, it may create public suspicion of favoritism in future decisions. Transparency, fairness and public accountability are crucial for effective management of CoI as these factors prevent situations where personal interests overshadow the public good. Integrating global principles that prioritize the public interest over private gain, such as fiduciary duties and ethical standards, is crucial. Approaches like transparency requirements, mandatory disclosures, independent oversight and recusal protocols can strengthen public trust. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) guidelines and the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) emphasize the importance of CoI management in ensuring impartial governance, making these frameworks relevant for Nepal’s reform efforts.

Cultural fluency

The challenge of addressing CoI in Nepal is compounded by the need for cultural fluency. This means recognizing and respecting local customs, beliefs and practices when chalking out policies and regulations. A one-size-fits-all approach to governance may not be effective, as it fails to account for the unique socio-cultural context in Nepal. By adopting measures that reflect local values while aligning with international standards, policymakers can enhance the effectiveness of CoI management strategies. Understanding the demand and supply dynamics of ethical governance will facilitate a more tailored approach that addresses specific community needs and expectations.

Constitutional commitment

Nepal’s Constitution commits to transparency and accountability; however, the country struggles with poor rankings on Transparency International’s corruption indices, partly due to CoI. The inconsistent enforcement of constitutional commitments has weakened the framework for addressing CoI, highlighting the need for comprehensive reform. Although the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) and the National Vigilance Center are tasked with combating corruption, political interference often hampers their effectiveness. CoI management is essential for maintaining integrity and public accountability. The strong influence of ethnocentric values, where family and community ties can affect official duties, complicates the situation. A framework that respects these cultural dynamics while aligning with constitutional principles is essential for meaningful reform.

Current laws, such as the Civil Procedure Code 2017 and the Judicial Council Act 2016, contain provisions for managing CoI but lack cohesive definitions and effective enforcement mechanisms. Judges, for example, are required to recuse themselves in cases where their impartiality might be questioned; however, there is insufficient guidance on how to define and manage CoI effectively.

Lessons for Nepal

Nepal’s approach to CoI can benefit from aligning with best practices from frameworks like the OECD and UNCAC, which emphasize transparency, accountability and independent oversight. Countries such as the US, the UK and India provide valuable examples for effective CoI management. In the US, the Ethics in Government Act requires public officials to disclose potential conflicts to prevent personal interests from interfering with their duties. In the case of Caperton v Massey (2009), the US Supreme Court ruled that perceived CoI is sufficient to necessitate recusal, highlighting the need for effective management of both real and perceived conflicts.

The UK emphasizes integrity and transparency through the Seven Principles of Public Life—including selflessness, integrity and accountability. In Porter v Magill (2001), the House of Lords ruled that any reasonable suspicion of bias could invalidate decisions, reflecting a rigorous approach to CoI. Additionally, the Transparency Register mandates the disclosure of financial interests, ensuring accountability among public officials.

India employs the principle of ‘office of profit’, which restricts Members of Parliament from holding positions that could influence their official duties, as upheld in Jaya Bachchan v Union of India (2006). Despite these regulations, instances like Vijay Mallya’s case highlight enforcement gaps, underscoring the need for stronger adherence and oversight in India’s CoI policies.

In the absence of a robust CoI Act, Nepali judges have often faced challenges related to their perceived and actual biases, leading to the practice of recusal in cases where conflicts are evident. Judicial orders have called for the enactment of a CoI Act, indicating recognition of the need for structured regulations to manage these conflicts effectively. Implementing a cohesive and culturally adapted CoI framework could help Nepal meet international standards, promoting accountability and public trust

Judicial approach

Despite the existence of a separate CoI Act, Nepal’s judiciary has primarily addressed CoI through corruption cases. Landmark judgments have stressed the importance of impartiality and accountability, promoting principles of constitutional morality that prioritize public interest over personal gains. Strengthening CoI legislation and enhancing judicial independence would reinforce these values and foster a culture of accountability.

CoI management bill

The Nepal Law Commission has proposed a ‘Conflict of Interest Management Bill’ to define CoI as an offense and establish penalties. However, the bill lacks cultural sensitivity and does not adequately consider the strong influence of kinship and community obligations in Nepal. Limited public engagement reduces social buy-in; thus, the bill should incorporate a rights-based framework and undergo public consultations. Initiatives focused on social behavior change that emphasize ethical decision-making would enhance its effectiveness.

Multi-sectoral action plan

Addressing CoI in Nepal requires a multi-sectoral approach that integrates legal, ethical, cultural and structural solutions. Establishing a National Ethics Commission would allow for the investigation of CoI cases, enforcement of compliance, and publication of annual reports setting standards for CoI management at all government levels. Creating provincial and local ethics councils would help tackle regional CoI challenges, ensuring accountability at the local government level.

Strategies focused on social behavior change that promote ethical decision-making and reflect local norms can assist officials in navigating social dynamics without compromising integrity. Comprehensive disclosure requirements mandating public officials to disclose assets, business affiliations and consultative roles, along with regular lifestyle audits, would enhance transparency.

Public awareness campaigns aimed at educating citizens on the role of CoI management in fostering integrity can establish community-based reporting channels for potential conflicts. Additionally, a binding code of conduct for public officials, along with cooling-off periods for officials transitioning to the private sector would significantly reduce CoI risks. Collaboration across sectors through a working group with government and civil society representation would help standardize CoI practices, while participatory monitoring via Community Ethics Committees utilizing the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) model could strengthen community oversight.

Finally, incorporating long-term ethics education into school curricula and professional initiatives focused on social behavior change will help promote a culture of integrity from a young age.

Conclusion

Nepal faces significant challenges regarding CoI that require an integrated approach encompassing legal, ethical and cultural reforms. The draft CoI Management Bill represents progress but requires refinement to align with Nepal’s values. Establishing a National Ethics Commission, local ethics councils and engaging the public will create a robust CoI framework rooted in fairness and accountability.

Addressing CoI is urgent for building a governance system that prioritizes transparency and ethical integrity. By implementing this multi-sectoral plan, which acknowledges the importance of cultural fluency and local contexts, Nepal can set a new standard for governance in the region, reaffirming its commitment to serving the public interest above private gain.

Significant setbacks are put forth for developmental amalgamation in the state these days. Numerous curve paths are carved for developmental agendas in the name of a political coalition. Behind the national cockpit of all political forces appears to be an inner party polarization, that seems more dramatic. Doctrines of all political forces seem stagnant as a desert. Merit over the catchment of philosophy remains sound unless guided by individual interest. Here the core doctrine remains disdained. Is this prolific in this global and polarized world?

MD Dharamdasani, a professor at the University of Rajasthan in his volume ‘Indian Diplomacy in Nepal’, proclaims that geopolitical tension always encapsulates the nation whether it is small or big, but in the polarized world, it is essential for every country to go with a liberal political system. His thought resembles a sort of insight that vibrates the essence of pessimism. Pessimism is that every nation is indifferent on its own, either in the form of freedom, liberty and sovereignty. A manual approach of ‘go and seek’ later led to the formation of a new ideology depicted as partisanship. Nowadays this seems more rampant. 

Clash of ideologies

Samuel P Huntington, an American political scientist, professes via his published volume ‘The Clash of Civilizations’ that people’s cultural and religious identities may be the preliminary cradle of conflict. Conflict in a tendency that no idea and prerequisites coincides with the minimum requirements of political ideology. Tendency to win is only a way for cadres. Is this fine with the political force? Can this policy of win-win be only a way out for any political party? Till now the political cadres are entirely under the thumbs of so-called leaders. Fine tuning of ideology is needed in Nepal, but the prosperity and virtue-based line seems to be more prominent. This prominence needs to be disdained by supremos. 

Every political force carries some peculiar ideologies. They are not identical and also need not be identical. Solid ideological roadmap streamed up as per the respective manifesto is a must for the political forces but that seems status quo Nepali panorama.  The emotional tendency swings the matter and manner, with no concrete view. Rather moots are hiked. Considering our domestic arena is narrow and ragtag, a smooth and normal line of panglossian  needs to be drawn up. It’s just like Laxman drawing a Laxmanrekha in the Ramayan to prohibit Rawan from abducting Sita. These types of lines need to be drawn on our devastating leaders also. 

Cultural baselines

Ideological baselines are termed a mandatory sensation for every political force, which plays a crucial role in the rationality-based political manner. Leaders were presumed to be moral and decent. The circumstances seem U-turned till date. Is this due to the irrationality of civilians or due to the cultural deviations of so-called leaders? In general, this needs to be reformed. The South Asian reformation wind is not so far and has already touched the South Asian countries like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and more. In other words, the geopolitical sensation of Nepal is also lavish and intensifying. The irrationality of political swing is not an old story. So, in order to crystallize the density of political disorder, incubation of cultural and ideological tendencies must occur. 

The tendency to grow, stabilize and replicate are the core values of the Nepali community, where the Nepali parties play and put forth their steps. Stepping up on the cultural background of the Nepali panorama, every active and passive political force chalked out their agendas to groom. Under the unacceptance of the Nepali community, every deal stayed fiasco. In time to go, the major forces of the country must kick-off for a synergistic boom for resilience. Many of the actors in the realm remain fragile for any de-facto progress. The youth-led morcha (frontier) are cooling their heels for the next awaited moment. 

Condensed ideological claim 

Retrospecting over the global political arena, no political force tends to sustain without an ideological foundation based on hearing and doing. But in Nepal, haranguing is more rampant than performing. The political ring is encircled by pedants and are so critical that no citizen can be in touch with leaders. So, the leaders are in a vicious gap with the general citizens. In other words, it can be addressed as a potential ideological gap. The well-defined ideology can act as a crystal clear roadmap on developmental amalgamation. Mediocre political forces of our state only yawn, and in the hay days they remain passive onlookers.  Is this the morale of ideological know-how?

Yet ideology remains status quo as natural laws depicted by scientific theories. But our social and normative theme is dynamic and adaptable as per contingency. This concludes and relays a sensation of indecorous disdain of existing doctrine, which opts not to change as need and desire. So is the political ideology of every country and political force. A country carries a holistic approach but the political unit carries a tiny perspective, which is perceivable. ideological claim is the motto of every party but they fail to think off to have a clear execution, it resembles that it is ideal of themselves. But in the long-run it remains ignorant even by the polemist. If we aim to bring about holistic reformation, we mandatorily need to dig an empirical foundation for a policy advocacy forum guided by internal think tanks of institutions of respected political parties. Finally, it must be adjusted by higher hierarchy on an annual and as-per-the-need basis.

If you have been involved in a legal case, then you must have heard expressions like these: Please negotiate rather than adjudicate. Twenty years of cry for justice, to no avail.  Oh! The case has been adjourned and deferred to another date for hearing. I did not receive my court summon, my right to a fair hearing has been sabotaged.  Why is the court process so laggard?  When will the court provide a full verdict of the decision? 

What if I tell you that Artificial Intelligence (AI) can actually help the judiciary reclaim its reputation.

What is AI?

AI is the ability of digital computers or computer controlled robots to perform tasks that are commonly associated with human beings and human intelligence. AI has the ability to reason, decipher codes, understand and give meaning to the word, summarize and provide conceptual analysis, learn from the past experiences and contrast the information. 

AI encompasses various technologies, including Automation, Machine Learning (ML), Machine Vision, Natural Language Processing (NLP), robotics, autonomous vehicles and generative AI. Automation uses technology to perform tasks with minimal human involvement. Machine Learning (ML) enables AI to learn from data and algorithms, gradually improving accuracy. Machine Vision allows machines to see and analyze visual information through cameras and digital processing whereas NLP enables computers to process human language, including tasks like text translation, sentiment analysis and speech recognition. Robotics focuses on tasks that are difficult or repetitive for humans to perform. Autonomous Vehicles use a combination of computer vision, image recognition and deep learning to navigate without human intervention whereas generative AI creates content, ranging from photorealistic art to text, emails and screenplays.

Covid-19 and after

The Covid-19 pandemic greatly challenged and disrupted the traditional working pattern of judiciary, which required ‘in-person’ proceedings. During the pandemic, either court systems were forced to temporarily shut down or to use alternative and innovative ways to conduct court proceedings. Also, Covid-19 raised an important question about accessibility of online justice to the indigent and marginalized communities of Nepal.

Access to justice

The citizens of Nepal feel detached from the court processes. Legal language being vague and technical, interferes in proper understanding of the court judgment. The need to be physically present despite the risks of natural disaster and absence of video conferencing or online dispute resolution modalities are some of the challenges. Translation of the landmark Supreme Court judgments, which largely affect constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights and life of Nepali people, into national languages, are yet to materialize. Bulk hearing of cases after scrupulous categorization, one of the judiciary’s ambitious projects, is yet to commence. The processes of popularizing Supreme Court Application among the court users, facilitating online summons and effective court SMS system are moving at a sluggish pace. Manual decision writing, no transcribing technology, non-listing of complicated legal words, scarce digitized legal document templates, lack of disabled friendly court technology are the biggest deal breakers. Digital evidence portals and online digital storage facilities are lacking. Lastly, the government’s disproportionate budget distribution and paltry technical assistance to the judiciary are hindering digitalization of the justice process in Nepal.

Digitizing legal services

Digitalization of the judiciary’s service in Nepal is nowhere near the international standards, though the apex court has been working on its ICT master plan with the effectiveness of automated Digital Case Management System (DCMs). In 2017, it launched a ‘Supreme Court App’ that shows the status of ongoing cases, decisions on cases and procedural progress. The fifth Supreme Court Action Plan proposes study of application of AI in case management and its application thereof. Also, Section 115 of the Supreme Court Regulations, 2074, provisions the formation of the Information Technology Committee, delegated authority to formulate policies regarding digitizing court services and monitoring its implementation. 

AI and judicial renaissance

A relatively small number of judges adjudicating over a large number of cases is the primary reason behind lengthy court proceedings. Despite a low ratio of judges to a high volume of cases, little has improved over a long period of time. Here are the innovative ways in which AI can revolutionize Nepal’s judiciary and swift access to justice.

• Digitization of legal documents: Digitizing court judgments, legal proceedings, deed documents, pleadings brief and contracts are tasks that Artificial Legal Intelligence (LI) can perform.
• Data visualization and analysis: The Supreme Court can explore and experiment with legal AI to visualize, identify patterns, diversify and analyze legal judgments, identify precedential value of decision, whether precedent (Najir) is binding or persuasive, whether the precedent is still upheld or quashed by a new precedent.
• Legal document design: The design-pattern concept can help the judiciary to develop legal documents in the format that is easy to read, non-ambiguous and understood by the lay reader. 
• Case flow management: AI can be deployed to track the progress of cases. It helps in reducing delays in administrative process, quick disposal of small claim matters, refers matters to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes and also monitors the effective execution of court judgments and judicial orders. 
• Access to legal justice: The technology-based legal processes known as ‘e-courts’ can maximize the participation of vulnerable sections to participate in judicial trials. AI-facilitated Online Consumer Mediation Centre can be applied in family law, and other civil law processes. 
• Access to legal data: IT-enabled AI and AI-supported Legal Intelligence (LI) can facilitate wider public access to legal data. Timely updates on progress in pending cases save time and money as service-seekers don’t have to visit courts frequently. 
• Applications in LI: Algorithms can play a major role in predictive analysis such as granting of bail and other discretionary elements such as parole or probation. 
• Legal information retrieval: AI can help to pinpoint legal catch phrases, which are effective in retrieving legal documents; for example judgments, case law, acts, testimonies.
• Smart legal contracts: The requirement for notarization, registration and verification of contractual documents for administrative and judicial purposes can be avoided with the introduction of smart contracts. Block-chain technology can be used to develop the framework for smart contracts and its effective implementation through online processes. 
• Chatbots: Developing an AI-assisted legal Chatbot, which answers the basic legal queries of people and provides probable legal solutions, can bolster the legal literacy and solution in Nepal at the micro level.
• Robot judges: The use of robot judges in place of the human is already being tested in the EU for smaller adjudications, and in the UK for parking ticket fines. Robot judges can be effective in matters where only the logical rational approach is necessary and procedural fairness requirements do not arise. For example, robot judges can be used in cases of cheque bounce.
• Automated dispute resolution (ADR): The ADR system refers to the use of an expert system and other advanced algorithmic tools to rule on a conflict. In commercial matters with win-win solutions involving high costs, ADR comes handy.
• Online dispute resolution: Judiciary can create online mediation or arbitration room and shift alternative dispute resolution processes such as mediation and arbitration to the digital platform.
• Routing legal tasks: AI can route administrative tasks such as case registration, Myad Tameli, Tarekh, case categorization, court fees computation, evidence and information dissemination, decision implementation, appeal application, and compensation regulations through its automated system.
• Legal research: Legal AI allows officers, judges and legal researchers to access world dockets, literature and necessary legal materials. The Supreme Court has established “Shilu Singh e-Library”, which allows access to Lexis Nexis, the legal AI.

Vigilance and AI

Despite its advantageous nature, AI cannot be left un-assisted. Interface of empathy and AI to safeguard the principle of natural justice and human rights can never be compromised. Data infringements and hacking of data can mislead the actions of AI, so a mechanism to prevent tampering of digital data and evidence is a must. AI for assisting the judiciary for a swift and hassles-free justice process is welcome, but it should not have a free rein.   

The author is a section officer at the Supreme Court of Nepal

On Oct 21, China and India reached a border agreement with regard to the Ladakh region, marking a departure from 2020, when there was a nasty fight between the two in which many soldiers lost their lives and several others suffered injuries. After that incident, a tense situation persisted between the two countries for about four years. The 2024 deal materialized after four years of military and diplomatic efforts.

After the agreement, India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said the agreement on army patrolling in certain areas had brought the situation back to where it was in 2020, before a deadly border clash. The very next day, Beijing confirmed that the two sides had “reached a solution” following “close communication” on relevant issues of the China-India border through diplomatic and military channels.

A new world order

On the meeting held between PM Modi and President Xi on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan on Oct 20-22, both sides stressed the need for a permanent resolution of border disputes for peace and tranquility for the two countries as well as for the entire region, expecting the detente to contribute to the creation of a new international order.

Per media reports, the troop withdrawal process has already begun and will complete in 10 days, making way for the implementation of other promises made in the agreement. Per the reports, both the leaders agreed, in principle, to resolve outstanding border issues through relentless efforts at diplomatic, political and military levels. The idea is to create a mutually fruitful and advantageous political, military and economic scenario in favor of peace and stability in the region, something which is expected to make way for a multi-polarized world and a new international order.

Friends in deed

India and China are our next-door neighbors, development partners, well-wishers and our friends in need and friends in deed. We are maintaining a very balanced and pragmatic relation with both the neighbors that are militarily strong, economically developed and prosperous, with formidable diplomatic clout. They are supportive of our socioeconomic development and stand for stability in Nepal. If they are in a good tune and in a good understanding it will give a direct and proportional positive impact in our political stability and economic development. We can and should cash and utilize the peace and prosperity dividend from both the countries. We should always stand as a true and trusted friend of both. We should not become unreliable political gamblers and must not play a trump card against each other. If we remain true friends and always care about our national interest, I am sure that the dynamics and dimension of economic support and investment from both the countries will continue to increase. If there will be deep rivalry or enmity or unhealthy competition or a war-like tense situation between India and China, Nepal will definitely suffer from all sides. Thereby this border agreement between two countries is not only good for them but also very good for Nepal too.

A constructive role 

Nepal should always play a very constructive role between the two neighbors and always remain as a link between the two. We should earn political trust and credibility while handling our foreign policy keeping in mind that consistency, clarity and continuity are good qualities of foreign policy. We should be good and dependable friends.

National interest in focus

Our two neighbors have two different ideologies and political systems, so we should maintain a very high degree of political and diplomatic equilibrium while steering our foreign policy. If we accord ideology the topmost priority in our foreign policy, we cannot maintain a good and balanced relationship with our neighbors. This is one of the important issues facing us in our neighborhood policy. The basic elements of our foreign policy should be the protection of national interest, sovereignty and territorial integrity, development and prosperity of the country and multi-engagement policy in the international arena through inclusive democracy. This may be the panacea for protection of the country and for national prosperity and happiness.

Opportunities and blessings

We need capital, technology, an innovative brain and unwavering honesty as well as determination at the political level to make our country happy and prosperous. When Latin Americans or Canadians can profit from the US’ development and prosperity, when Africans and Muslims can benefit from the prosperity of Europe, why can’t we benefit from the development and prosperity of our two neighbors? We should be politically smart and honest, visionary and diplomatically skillful and pragmatic and free from biases against our next-door neighbors to benefit from them.

Views are personal