Submit your Article

Recalling the days when Nepali football stood tall stadiums jam-packed to the brim, roofless concrete stands echoing with the thunder of supporters, spectators holding their breath in suspense at what would unfold next. Players surged with adrenaline, determined to conquer, while journalists crowded the sidelines, their stories destined for the front pages of national dailies and evening television bulletins. Today, that vibrant era feels like a story from a distant past. More than 800 days have passed without a single tournament, leaving fans and players alike in suspense. Before confronting this long-standing silence, it is worth revisiting the golden chapters of Nepali football, its triumphs, passion, and glory before returning to the setbacks that have left the nation’s favorite sport in limbo.

Football first rolled into Nepali history during the Rana regime, when the distant echoes of British colonial influence could be felt across South Asia. In those days, a handful of ambitious youths journeyed to Indian cities like Delhi, Calcutta, and Bangalore suburbs in search of higher education. They returned home with more than diplomas; they brought with them a spark of a new passion. Among these pioneers were the privileged Thapas and Basnets, whose minds had been shaped by foreign culture and whose feet were now guided by the rhythm of a ball. While figures like Nar Shumsher Rana would later formalize the game, it was the daring footsteps of Narayan Narasingh Rana of Thamel and Chandrajung Thapa that first sent the ball bouncing across Nepali soil. Soon, the streets of Kathmandu seemed to pause whenever a match was underway from the palace courtyards of Thamel to the dusty grounds of Jawalakhel and the open fields of Tudikhel as the ball carried the dreams of a new generation, slowly weaving a football culture that would capture the hearts of a nation for generations to come.

Football in Nepal took shape in 1934, when sides like Mahabir-11, NRT-11, and Jawalakhel-11 first laced their boots, with Jawalakhel lifting the inaugural institutional trophy under Nar Shumsher. The game was banned at times, yet it thrived in palace courtyards and on dusty grounds, carried forward by sheer passion. By 1947, even as politics unsettled the nation, the first football committee emerged. King Tribhuvan placed his name on the Tribhuvan Challenge Shield at Tudikhel, while the Ram Janaki Cup brought early structure. After the end of the Rana regime in 1951, Nepal got its Football Federation, ANFA (All Nepal Football Association), and the Prajatantra era under King Tribhuvan gave football new life.

The Ram Janaki Cup was reshaped into the Martyr’s Memorial League, Nepal’s first structured division-league system, turning scattered contests into an organized competition. The opening of Dasarath Stadium in 1959 elevated the stage, hosting celebrated clashes like King-11 vs Prime Minister-11. Through the 1960s and 70s, the Mahendra Gold Cup, Nar Trophy, and ANFA Cup drew roaring crowds and deepened football’s hold on the people. Nepal joined FIFA in 1970, hosted its first major international tournament in 1982, and steadily expanded into youth and women’s football, transforming street games into a national passion woven into everyday life.

Yet glory has never come without scars. On 12 March 1988, Dasarath Stadium, once the symbol of pride, turned into a scene of heartbreak. A sudden hailstorm during the Tribhuvan Challenge Shield final sparked panic among 25,000 fans. With the exits locked, a deadly stampede claimed more than 70 lives. The tragedy carved a wound deep into Nepali football, a reminder of the sport’s fierce popularity and the fragility of its infrastructure. Even amid grief, the national team carried hope forward. Nepal’s first steps on the international stage came at the 1982 Asian Games in New Delhi, where YB Ghale etched his name as the nation’s first international goal scorer. Two years later, hosting the 1984 South Asian Games, Nepal struck gold by defeating Bangladesh 4–2 in the final, a moment that became a beacon of pride for a country still finding its place in world football. The 1990s brought another golden spark, as captain Raju Kaji Shakya led Nepal to victory over India in the 1993 South Asian Games, winning on penalties after a 2–2 draw, a triumph still celebrated in Nepali football circles.

Amidst turmoil and uncertainty, one constant stood tall: the Martyr’s Memorial A-Division League, the heartbeat of Nepali football. It gave structure to the domestic game, forged talents who would don the national colors, and kept the dream alive even when the nation faced adversity. Beyond the league, a network of grassroots academies and local tournaments began to bloom, nurturing the next generation of players.

Since its inception in 1954, the Martyr’s Memorial A-Division League has crowned 17 different champions across 45 editions, reflecting the unpredictable and competitive spirit of Nepali football. Early years saw clubs like Mahabir, Police Force, and New Road Team etch their names into history, while the 1970s and 80s were dominated by Ranipokhari Corner Team and the rise of Sankata Boys Club. The mid-1980s ushered in a new powerhouse, Manang Marshyangdi Club, which went on to become the league’s most decorated side with eight titles, shaping modern domestic football. Despite its long history, the league was not held in several periods—1958–60, 1964–66, 1988, 1990–94, 1996, 1999, 2001–02, 2007–09, 2011–12, 2014–15, and 2020–21—due to political instability, the Maoist insurgency, administrative conflicts, natural disasters, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Alongside the historic A-Division League, Nepal also witnessed the rise of the National League (later known as the Red Bull National League), a club-level competition where champions earned the chance to compete on the continental stage, previously in the AFC President’s Cup and now the AFC Cup. To broaden participation, the franchise-based Nepal Super League was introduced for two seasons, in 2011–12 and 2015, bringing a professional and commercial flavor to Nepali football. However, the April 2015 earthquake halted the 2015 season, pausing professional football nationwide and delaying competitive play until the 2018–19 edition of the Martyr’s Memorial A-Division League. Despite these interruptions, both leagues have played a crucial role in developing talent, providing clubs with a platform to shine, and keeping the spirit of Nepali football alive. Later decades saw the emergence of challengers like Three Star Club, Nepal Police Club, and Machhindra FC, while new champions such as Church Boys United lifted the trophy in 2023, marking the continuing evolution of the league.

For over 800 days, Nepali football has been in limbo, its future uncertain and its heartbeat faint, as the Division League, once the lifeblood of domestic football, remains dormant. ANFA cites financial hurdles and infrastructure challenges for the delays, but beneath the surface, mismanagement, the absence of a structured football calendar, and constant internal conflicts have left the sport adrift. Dashrath Stadium, once a stage of dreams, now tells a story of neglect, with flooded pitches, flickering lights, and glaring safety hazards, while the AFC’s early concerns about the pitch feel minor compared to the broader decay gripping the nation’s premier venue. Clubs invest heavily in strategy and talent, yet without a regular calendar, their efforts risk unraveling, forcing many players to migrate abroad, chasing survival over glory on meager salaries. Frequent sackings and conflicts involving national team coaches further reflect ANFA’s unstable management, while rumors persist that administrators and members struggle with basic technology, unable even to manage simple emails.

Instability in Nepali football is not new; even under the legendary player-administrator Ganesh Thapa, structural cracks were visible, and the match-fixing scandal shattered trust. Subsequent administrations have failed to restore order, leaving the entire football ecosystem teetering on the edge of a once-thriving world now caught in the shadow of neglect, waiting for a spark to reignite its lost glory. Administrators’ apparent lack of qualification, combined with internal disputes, continue to erode the organization, while the Cricket Association of Nepal surges ahead with effective management, inadvertently raising moral and ethical pressure on ANFA as football lags behind its rising sporting rival. If the current trajectory continues, Nepali football risks fading into obscurity, much like football has in parts of India, where cricket’s dominance overshadowed the sport, emphasizing the urgent need for accountability, modernization, and strategic vision to reclaim even a fraction of its former prestige.

We know that the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 was the first document to refer to social, economic, and cultural rights, including the rights to education, work, property, and social protection. In 1941, the Atlantic Charter was declared, which paved the way for the development of an International Bill of Rights during 1942–45. The adoption and proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948 marked a historic milestone in the field of human rights.

The historic Article 2, which states that “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind… no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional,” affirms that everyone is equal, irrespective of differences. The UDHR also emphasizes public participation. Article 21 declares that everyone has the right of equal access to public service in their country, and further elaborates on the right to periodic elections and secret ballots.

Article 25.1 states: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and wellbeing of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age, or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1976 and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1976 oblige signatory nations to uphold human rights. The UNDP also highlights human rights as a central concern. Nepal is a signatory to these conventions, covenants, and protocols.

Article 1 of the UDHR—“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”—clearly enshrines the principle of equality. Article 2, which prohibits distinctions of any kind, further reinforces this. These are moral claims, inalienable and inherent in all human beings by virtue of their humanity. Over time, these claims have been articulated and codified into what we now call human rights, and have been translated into legal rights through national and international law. The basis of such legal rights lies in the consent of the governed—the subjects of these rights.

Human rights are well defined in the following lines: “The values of dignity and equality of all members of the human race, like many other basic principles which underlie what we today call human rights, can be found in virtually every culture and civilization, religion and philosophical tradition.” 

Human rights: Comments and interpretations (1948)

The United Nations once designated the International Year of Human Rights “to broaden and deepen human rights learning on the basis of the principles of universality, individuality, interdependence, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity, constructive dialogue and cooperation, with a view to enhancing the promotion and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

The first article of the UDHR expresses universality through the principle of human dignity. The second article guarantees entitlement to rights without discrimination of any kind. The Preamble recognizes the “inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family” as the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.

In Nepal, the culture of human rights is relatively new. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was established in 2000 as a statutory body under the Human Rights Commission Act of 1997. Its responsibilities, now constitutionally mandated by the Constitution of Nepal (2015), complement the work of the Supreme Court, the Office of the Attorney General, and other judicial and quasi-judicial bodies.

The Commission was founded in line with the 1991 UN-sponsored Paris Principles, a detailed set of guidelines on the status of national institutions. These principles, endorsed by the UN Commission on Human Rights (1992) and the UN General Assembly (1993), became the foundation for the NHRC’s establishment. As per Article 248 and 249 of the Constitution of Nepal, the NHRC is meant to function as an independent and autonomous constitutional body.

Every year on Dec 10, the world observes International Human Rights Day, a reminder of the inherent dignity and equal rights of all members of the human family. The United Nations first recognized the day universally in 1950. Yet, it is regrettable that human rights violations persist in many forms.

The commemoration of this day reminds us that human rights must never be violated. The principles of the UDHR, adopted in 1948, remain crucial to creating a more just and rights-friendly world. However, violations continue, and the struggle for human dignity remains urgent. Discrimination based on caste, religion, gender, and disability persists across the world. While constitutions guarantee human rights, implementation often falls short. Even the Human Rights Commissions, which are tasked with addressing these issues, sometimes fail to respond adequately. Gender-based violence, domestic abuse, sexual exploitation, and human trafficking remain widespread—dark stains on humanity’s conscience.

The UDHR is reinforced by two essential covenants adopted in 1966—the ICCPR and the ICESCR—which clarify and enact the rights it proclaims. Today, new challenges such as climate change threaten the realization of human rights globally. World leaders must unite to address discrimination, inequality, and violence of all kinds. Human rights have become a global concern, essential for building a just and peaceful world. The core message of commemorating the 76th International Human Rights Day and the UDHR should be the vision of a discrimination-free world.

The KP Oli government is fully responsible for Monday’s massacre. I was an eyewitness at the Civil Hospital in New Baneshwar from 12 noon to 7 in the evening, while under curfew. I had gone there for a routine check of my wife’s poor health. Tear gas smoke filled the hospital premises, yet the doctors and nurses continued administering first aid to the wounded protesters. Some, gravely injured, had to be treated on the ground as the emergency ward overflowed. The indiscriminate use of force by security personnel was a gross violation of human rights. Meanwhile, human rights watchdogs failed to monitor effectively. No commissioner was present on the ground; instead, they remained in air-conditioned rooms issuing press statements.

Thus, the NHRC was negligent in monitoring the human rights situation. The demands of GenZ are genuine, yet the government has shown total indifference to the gross violations committed against protesters in today’s context.

On India’s Independence Day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced what he called a “gift” for consumers this Diwali in the form of long-awaited Goods and Services Tax (GST) 2.0 reforms. The announcement was expected to come from the Finance Minister, the chair of the all-powerful GST Council, but many got a surprise when the PM, on August 15, announced the upcoming GST reforms in keeping with his promise to reduce the rates before Diwali 2025, even before a formal approval from the council. 

The government wants to move to a simplified tax structure of five and 18 percent, replacing the current tax rates of 12 percent and 28 percent. This move from the Modi government is meant to increase revenues amid rising concerns in Nepal regarding a surge in imports from India.     During its 56th GST Council meeting, India proposed reducing the four main revenue slabs of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) to two main ones, after the US decided to impose a 50 percent tariff on most Indian products, apparently to increase revenues by increasing domestic consumption.     Accordingly, the previous four slabs of 5, 12, 18 and 28 rates have come down to only two main slabs of 5 and 12 percent. As for some tobacco, pan masala products and expensive vehicles, GST has surged to 40 percent.

The council has reduced the rates for daily necessities, which were charging 18 percent GST, to five percent, covering more than 175 items, including toothpaste, talcum powder and shampoo.

Meanwhile, five percent remains the rate for items of daily consumption, other food items, FMCG and other items. What’s more, the Modi government has proposed reducing the GST from 12 to five percent on hotel bookings and cinema tickets. The council has proposed reducing the GST on medicines and medical supplies under health services, which are currently charging 12 percent to five percent.

If things go as planned, medicines used in the treatment of cancer will enjoy GST exemption along with personal health insurance and life insurance. According to Indian media, there is a possibility of reducing the GST from 12 to 5 percent by exempting products like paneer, pizza, bread, khakra, fruit juices, coconut water, butter, cheese, pasta and ice cream.

What’s more, the council has proposed a five percent GST on chemical fertilizers used in agriculture, clothes, solar panels, stationery, beauty products, umbrellas and shoes. Under the new scheme of things, the Modi government has proposed reducing GST to 18 percent from 28 percent on electronics like TV sets and AC equipment as well as on petrol hybrid cars.

If not implemented properly, the proposed two-rate structure of five percent and 18 percent could be a perfect opportunity for disaster with the 13 percentage point difference between the two rates turning out to be a golden opportunity for tax evaders. This huge difference in rates can also lead to an inverted tariff structure for almost all supplies, which is why it is assumed that input tax credit has been allowed for this slab.

The council’s decision will take effect once the Government of India publishes it in its gazette.

Meanwhile, Nepali experts and traders fear that the extensive changes in indirect tax rates in the form of GST on the part of India will adversely affect Nepal's industry and business.

At a time when the gray market is moving parallely in Nepal, the unauthorized import of cheap goods will increase even further, causing a negative impact on Nepal's industry and business sector, and subsequently on the overall revenue and the economy as a whole. Entrepreneurs warn that the Indian government’s move will pose a huge challenge to Nepal's industries that are producing essential goods.

The government should take adequate steps to protect relevant domestic industries from harmful effects of the Indian move. 

The Government of Nepal’s arbitrary decision of Sept 4 to impose a blanket ban on 26 social media platforms including Facebook, YouTube, X, Instagram and LinkedIn, will have far-reaching consequences for Nepal’s digital ecosystem, democracy, freedom of expression and independent journalism. 

Social media in Nepal has become a vital space for civic engagement, where citizens, activists, and journalists share critical information, challenge state narratives, and demand accountability from those in power. Silencing these platforms not only undermines constitutional guarantees but also pushes dissent underground, fostering fear, censorship, and self-censorship.

Silencing dissent and independent journalism 

Media Action Nepal’s record shows that nearly 2,500 professional journalists—at least 1,000 of them formerly associated with corporate and big media houses in roles ranging from reporters to editors—are now running independent small newsrooms, providing the public with information of public interest. Alongside them, thousands of digital content creators engage with audiences, expose frauds, scrutinize governance failures, and contribute to Nepal’s economy through taxes they pay. These two sections of the media ecosystem have become inseparable from the lives of people in Nepal and the diaspora, serving as watchdogs over the state. Their independence from political parties has irritated the ruling coalition, which has repeatedly harassed journalists under the Electronic Transaction Act merely for reporting. This blanket ban is the government’s latest attempt to silence critical and independent voices.

Political motive

A second driver of this regressive move is political cunning. The Nepali Congress–CPN-UML coalition has grown increasingly wary of emerging political forces, independent candidates, and analysts who might challenge its dominance in the upcoming by-elections in Rupandehi district. Reports of former President Bidya Devi Bhandari attempting to position herself to lead CPN-UML have further fueled Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s insecurities, leading to this decision rooted as much in personal ego as in political control. None of these justifications, however, can legitimize a measure that gravely undermines press freedom, shrinks civic space, and erodes the democratic aspirations of the Nepali people.

Arbitrary and authoritarian 

This blanket ban on social media is neither legal nor constitutional. The Supreme Court of Nepal, in its recent order, did not authorize an administrative prohibition of social media platforms. Rather, it instructed the government to draft appropriate legislation to regulate digital platforms in line with the Constitution’s guarantees of fundamental rights. By issuing a sweeping administrative order, the GoN has misinterpreted the Court’s directive and acted far beyond its authority.

The Constitution of Nepal enshrines clear protections that this ban directly violates. Article 17 guarantees the right to freedom of opinion and expression; Article 19 guarantees the right to communication; and Article 27 guarantees the right to information. These provisions make it clear that in a democratic system and an open market economy, global digital connectivity cannot be arbitrarily censored. Democracy and authoritarianism cannot co-exist, and any restrictions on fundamental freedoms must be lawful, proportionate, and strictly necessary.

Internationally, Nepal has binding obligations as a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified in 1991. Article 19 of the ICCPR guarantees the right to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, across frontiers. Restrictions are permissible only under very narrow conditions—to protect the rights and reputation of others, national security, public order, or public health and morals—and even then, they must meet the three-part test of legality, necessity, and proportionality. The government’s blanket ban fails on all three counts. It is not based on law passed by Parliament, it is disproportionate in its scope, and it undermines the very essence of freedom of expression itself.

By imposing such an arbitrary ban through administrative order, Nepal not only violates its own Constitution but also disregards its international human rights commitments. The action sets a dangerous precedent of executive overreach, reverses the principle that rights are the rule and restrictions the exception, and risks isolating Nepal from the global democratic community. This ban is unconstitutional, arbitrary, and unlawful. It must be immediately repealed, and any future regulation of digital platforms must be pursued through transparent, participatory parliamentary processes in compliance with Nepal’s constitutional guarantees and international obligations.

Broken connectivity

The ban also strikes at the heart of social and economic life. For millions of Nepali people with family members working abroad, social media platforms are essential tools for affordable and instant communication. Cutting off these channels deepens the isolation of families and disrupts the social fabric of a nation heavily dependent on remittances. Economically, the decision will hurt small newsrooms, digital-first outlets, and independent content creators who rely on social media for visibility, outreach, and revenue generation. At a time when Nepal is striving to expand its digital economy and global connectivity, this ban risks isolating the country from international networks, stifling innovation, and discouraging investment in the digital sector.

Civic assault

There is no space for attacks on fundamental freedoms in a democracy. The arbitrary suspension of social media platforms is not only unconstitutional but also a direct assault on civic space and public trust. Unless revoked immediately, this ban will leave ruling parties morally and politically accountable to the people of Nepal and will bear long-term costs in terms of public legitimacy, international credibility, and democratic backsliding.

This ban represents a regressive step that jeopardizes democratic values, erodes citizens’ trust in institutions, and undermines Nepal’s international commitments to human rights. Such measures weaken—not strengthen—democracy, and risk pushing Nepal further away from its democratic aspirations and obligations.

Restore freedoms

First, the government must withdraw this administrative decision without delay. Any attempt to deactivate or restrict social media platforms in the absence of legislative or constitutional grounds amounts to authoritarian overreach. Second, regulation of digital platforms, if required, must strictly comply with constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression, right to communication, freedom of association, and right to information, as well as Nepal’s binding obligations under international human rights treaties.

Third, any future steps regarding social media governance must follow due process and democratic procedure. A comprehensive and transparent legislative process through Parliament is the only legitimate avenue for framing social media laws. This process must be inclusive, consultative, and rooted in the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality as laid out in Article 19 of the ICCPR and Nepal’s own constitutional framework. Administrative shortcuts, like the present order, erode the very foundations of democracy and push the country toward authoritarianism.

If the ruling parties continue to enforce this ban, they risk being held accountable not only by the Nepali people but also before international human rights mechanisms. Democracy is built on freedoms, not restrictions—and it is only by respecting those freedoms that Nepal can maintain its democratic credibility at home and abroad.

The author, a global advocate for freedom of expression, is the founding chair of Media Action Nepal