Submit your Article

The Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) is essential for an effective and safe operation of the nation’s aviation sector. However, because of its dual function as a service provider and a regulator, a major issue has emerged. This article examines the complexity of this conundrum, potential conflicts of interest, and ramifications for Nepal’s aviation industry.

Civil aviation authorities are often established to govern and control the aviation sector by setting safety standards, providing licenses and monitoring compliance. However, CAAN also offers a number of aviation-related services in Nepal, such as flight navigation, airport management and air traffic control. Concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest and objectivity in regulatory judgments are brought up by this duality.

A civil aviation regulator’s main responsibility is to guarantee the security and safety of aviation operations. To prevent accidents and incidents, regulatory organizations must implement high standards, conduct audits and monitor compliance. Questions concerning an aviation authority’s ability to maintain strict monitoring and objectivity arise when it acts as a service provider. The worry is that regulatory choices can be influenced by the need to sustain service revenue.

The inherent conflict of interest in the dual function issue is a crucial component. The authority’s financial interests as a service provider may conflict with regulatory choices made in the interest of safety. Transparency, accountability and public trust are all crucial components of an effective regulatory environment, yet they are all undercut by this contradiction. The possibility of conflicts of interest is one of the key issues brought on by CAAN’s dual duty. As a service provider, CAAN might put its own financial and operational interests ahead of those of others, which could occasionally conflict with its obligations as a regulator to uphold safety and fair competition. For instance, CAAN’s own financial success as a service provider might have an impact on decisions regarding the construction of airport infrastructure.

In order for regulation to be effective, it must be fair and open. There may be concerns about CAAN’s independence when the same organization is in charge of both the provision of services and their regulation. Fair and consistent laws that put the public interest ahead of financial gains are essential for the safety and expansion of the aviation sector.

The aviation industry in Nepal has been steadily growing, drawing both domestic and foreign firms. It is critical that CAAN’s interests as a service provider are not taken into account when making regulatory decisions in order to maintain a healthy and competitive market. If new entrants feel there aren’t any level playing fields, this situation can put them off.

In many nations, the civil aviation authority only performs regulatory duties, leaving other organizations in charge of providing services. By ensuring clearer lines between regulation and operation, this separation reduces possible conflicts and increases openness.

Nepal may think about changing the functions of CAAN to handle the conflict. Separate organizations for regulatory monitoring and service delivery could be established to help prevent conflicts of interest and advance a more open and competitive aviation sector. A step like this would bring Nepal’s practices in line with the world’s best practices and promote the security and development of the industry.

Several options could be investigated in order to overcome the difficulties arising from CAAN’s multiple roles:

Role separation: One strategy is to totally divide the regulatory and service provider roles. To ensure a sharper focus on safety and impartiality, this would need the creation of separate institutions responsible for regulation and service provision.

Strict governance and transparency: In order for CAAN to continue serving in both of its responsibilities, a strong governance structure and transparency tools need to be put in place. To manage conflicts of interest and guarantee that financial concerns are not influencing regulatory decisions, clear standards can be set.

Consultations with the industry: Involving stakeholders from the aviation sector in decision-making processes can help spot potential conflicts and guarantee impartial viewpoints. This strategy may result in cooperative solutions that put fairness and safety first.

CAAN faces a difficult issue because of its dual function as a service provider and a regulator. For the aviation sector to grow sustainably, the proper balance between meeting its requirements and guaranteeing impartial regulation must be struck. Nepal can overcome this challenge and establish a more open, secure and competitive aviation environment by embracing international best practices and reorganizing its functions. 

In my previous column, I discussed how chronic political instability is affecting the conduct of our foreign policy. Here, I delve into how foreign powers, big and small alike, influence Nepal’s foreign policy. We often criticize our politicians for their lack of maturity and consistency. In most foreign policy discourses, I often hear this question: Who will believe us (read our politicians)? It is a reality that our politicians are neither serious nor have they realized their weaknesses. But it would be unjust to solely blame our politicians without considering other aspects like how foreign powers are behaving with us. Nepal’s key priorities are economic prosperity and social development. For a long time, we have been mobilizing our foreign policy to achieve these goals.

From Prithivi Narayan Shah to the current set of leaders, all have realized that Nepal is situated between India and China, understanding the difficulties of being caught between two global powerhouses. For a long time, our Rana rulers tried to live in isolation out of fear that opening up could threaten their regime. Nevertheless, they still endeavored to serve both their personal interests and national interests. After the 1950s, Nepal began diversifying its economic, security, development and trade policies or looking beyond its immediate neighbors. Let’s consider the current situation. We are conducting our foreign policy in accordance with the 2015 constitution.

Article 51 of the constitution states: “Safeguarding the freedom, sovereignty, territorial integrity, nationality, independence, and dignity of Nepal, the rights of the Nepalis, border security, economic well-being, and prosperity shall be the basic elements of the national interests of Nepal.” Nepal places economic diplomacy at the forefront of its engagement with the wider international community. We need money and technology to accelerate social development and economic prosperity. Lately, we have been vocal about our reluctance to take on significant loans, preferring grants for infrastructure development. Our stated position is that we will not align with any strategic or military blocs.

Nepal takes a neutral position in regional and international conflicts, consistently advocating for their resolution through peaceful means, with some exceptions resulting from adventurous policies of our politicians. Nepal believes in non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, non-aggression, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. For instance, Nepal opposed the Russian attack on Ukraine while maintaining a neutral stance on other issues. Many argue that this stance contradicts Nepal’s non-alignment policy, but it aligns with our stated policy. If one sovereign country attacks another, Nepal cannot remain neutral and opposes such actions but avoids taking sides.

Our message is clear: we do not wish to be embroiled in big power rivalries, and we urge major powers not to involve us in their geopolitical games. Currently, amid the Middle East crisis, we maintain the same policy. If not a zone of peace, we aspire to become a zone of investment. We have a straightforward message for major powers: we understand and protect your security and other legitimate concerns, but only a prosperous and strong Nepal can effectively address those issues, so invest in our country. Of course, challenges such as corruption and bureaucratic red tape exist, but the investment climate in Nepal is comparatively favorable, and we have big markets like India and China in close proximity. Despite getting huge support from major countries in Nepal’s social and economic development, the country is starting to feel the heat of geopolitical tensions. As these tensions escalate, there is a fear among our politicians that major powers may pull Nepal into their orbit through economic assistance. As major powers roll out strategic initiatives one after another, there are concerns that Nepal may become ensnared in a geopolitical ambush. Not only politicians, but senior bureaucrats also find themselves in awkward positions as they consolidate all bilateral issues under one strategic basket. And, there is a lack of understanding among politicians and bureaucrats about these issues, and there have been no efforts to educate them.

By closely monitoring negotiations between our leaders and major powers, we can see that our leaders are facing pressure. Whenever they engage in talks with their counterparts, they struggle to avoid committing to strategic projects outright. Since they cannot outright reject them out of fear for their regime’s stability, they attempt to reassure that Nepal could consider such initiatives after thorough study and consensus at home. Due to such apprehensions, our politicians are even hesitant to accept pure development projects without strings attached. Similarly, diplomats in Kathmandu bypass the due process in dealing with Nepal. Instead of going through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, foreign countries tend to approach political leaders and certain ministries directly seeking their consent. For example, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs may be unaware of a host of initiatives proposed by major powers. If there is institutional memory, foreign countries cannot complain about policy inconsistency or lack of ownership across governments. If all proposals go through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which remains unaffected by changes in government, it ensures policy continuity to some extent.

Our stance remains that, due to our geopolitical location and other factors, we cannot align with major powers. Whether termed neutral, non-aligned or otherwise, our bottom line is clear: we seek engagement solely on economic terms. If major powers engage with Nepal in this manner, frequent changes in government may not pose significant difficulties. Therefore, support and invest in Nepal, so that we can safeguard the security and other legitimate interests of our friends. If major powers attempt to turn Nepal into a battleground for their conflicts, it will be detrimental not only to the Nepali people but also to the major powers. We understand that our neighboring countries, both near and distant, desire to see a stable and prosperous Nepal, as it serves their interests. My request to all: we aspire to grow with you as a sovereign and peaceful country. As I mentioned in my previous opinion piece, major countries should not favor one party over another or play them against each other. Instead, they should adopt a Nepal-centric policy with the economy at the forefront. Moreover, major parties should collaborate to formulate a common position on the issues mentioned above. We want to declare Nepal as a Zone of Investment.

In 2010, for a holiday spree with my wife and two daughters, we visited the Island Jungle Resort in the Chitwan National Park (mid-west Nepal). At the time, several safari resorts operated within the national park perimeter, as did the Island Jungle Resort. 

With the memories of our previous visit to Sauraha still fresh, we yearned for a new wildlife experience, something off the beaten path. And so, with a stroke of luck, we found ourselves at the Island Jungle Resort in Bandarjhola, a unique and secluded spot about 35 km northwest of Narayanghat. 

The choice we made paid off. Nestled in a dense riverine forest and surrounded by vast grasslands, the Island Jungle Resort in Bandarjhola, about 35 km northwest of Narayanghat, offered a unique setting. Unlike the resorts in Sauraha, it was hemmed in by the river Narayani on two sides, with the other two sides ringed by the river’s subsidiaries, giving it the charm of an island. The resort’s name was a perfect fit. 

And, what’s more, my two daughters were thrilled to bits when we took a boat ride across the Narayani River, the only approach to the resort. With no other nearby resorts, the wilderness seemed absolute, as wild and natural as possible. “Wow, it’s different from Sauraha,” our youngest daughter, Bubul, hollered gleefully. The rest of us nodded, grinning from ear to ear.

In 2012, the government announced the closure of luxury jungle safari hotels inside the protected zone, citing possible harm to the park’s ecology, and issued eviction notices to all seven luxury resorts there, including the Island Jungle Resort. The decree, however, allowed the resorts to relocate outside the national park perimeter.

Upon arrival at the resort, our excitement snowballed to find the setting done in genuine aesthetics, in harmony with the natural surroundings and small cozy cottages amidst a spacious garden decked with diverse trees, plants, and shrubs. The dining hall was delightfully expansive, with a well-stocked bar and seating arrangement that extended outdoors with a wooden deck almost at arm's length to the rippling waters of the Narayani River. Sheer bliss! 

Our schedule was packed with thrilling activities, including a jungle walk, a canoe ride, and the much-anticipated elephant ride. The sight of our elephant, Laxmikali, and her mahout, Kumal, working in perfect harmony was a sight to behold. The elephant ride itself was a wild adventure, leaving us all exhilarated. 

The first hour of the safari offered close views of deer, including the imposing sambars, along with a motley of birds such as jungle fowl, black partridge, a covey of quails, and the ubiquitous peafowls, not the least startled by our approaching elephant—appearing almost tame.  

But we fancied seeing a lumbering rhino, if not the most elusive of all, the mighty Royal Bengal Tiger, albeit we knew it stood a fat chance—one in a million. 

But the real excitement began when our elephant, Laxmikali, led us past a freshly stirred mud wallow, followed by fresh footprints. It was clear that a rhino had recently taken a mud bath and wandered into the woods, leaving a hot trail. ‘A rhino,’ Kumal whispered, and our pursuit began as we followed the footprints. 

Kumal masterfully navigated Laxmikali through the elephant grass, the woods, the seemingly impenetrable scrub, and thickets with spiny thorns—nothing seemed to stop Laxmikali.

The trail suddenly went cold when we assumed we were closing in. It was almost 6 pm, and the fading light reminded us that we had very little time before it would get too dark to continue. Kumal led Laxmikali to take a detour. With our fingers crossed, we kept our eyes straining hard to penetrate the thick undergrowth, trying to catch sight of our quarry as our tusker lumbered. 

As the setting sun reddened the horizon, sending diffused crimson rays through the woods, the jungle burst into life. The bulbuls, the barbets, the orioles, and a myriad of avian species that abounded the rainforest commenced chattering their loudest.

Jungle fowls fell in, calling each other lustily, and then a distant peafowl let out a shrill ‘meow’' All the resident birds seemed to join in a chorus to announce that dusk approached close—time to turn in for the day. Wait a minute! We suddenly stumbled upon the lost spoor! 

With renewed hopes and a redoubled pace, we crashed through the foliage. Twice, my foot got trapped in jungle creepers, swinging branches lashed at my face, thorns clawed at my arms, and I virtually got banged by overhead branches for all I cared.

My co-riders (my wife and daughters) were in no less harrowing condition—but no less excited. We continued our pursuit, albeit the chances of spotting the animal appeared slim. And as Kumal nudged Laxmikali back towards camp, our heart sank. Hang on! We had barely taken a few strides when we virtually bumped into it! “There it is,” Gun Bahadur Kumal called, almost in a whisper, and pointed to a clump of thorny bush.

And there stood our fearless quarry eyeing back at us, almost five feet at the shoulder and nine feet long, the pride of the Chitwan National Park, the inimitable Greater One-horned Rhino. Our pursuit had paid off.  

On our way back, Kumal suddenly stopped Laxmikali at a spot, dismounted, observed closely at some footmarks, and even ran his fingers over them. To our amazement, they were the fresh pugmarks of a male tiger. ‘Darn it! We missed the tiger by just a minute or two,’ said Kumal, shaking his head. We all froze in awe. ‘Only a few minutes? Oh, no,’ said Smi, my eldest daughter, sounding frustrated. The tiger had eluded us, leaving us in awe of its stealth. 

Back at the resort with a mug of chilled beer, I sat on the deck close to the water, enjoying the bracing breeze as I watched the nearby Narayani roll by in the darkness, the ripples mirroring the glimmer of the moonlight.

My mind kept recalling the day’s mind-boggling ride—a real humdinger. The only thing that bugged me was missing out on the privilege of clapping eyes on the king of the jungle, the Royal Bengal Tiger. Dang it! I said to myself and swore aloud. 

Just then, a night heron wailed plaintively close from the darkened river bank. Then I froze, goosebumps exploding all over my body. From the deep recesses of the jungle, a tiger roared.

[email protected] 

In today’s digital age, misinformation doesn’t just distort reality; it distorts justice, tarnishes reputations and erodes trust in institutions. Let’s delve into a poignant example illustrating the devastating impact of false information on society.

It was a tragic day when a young girl was found dead by hanging at her school in Chitwan. As police initiated their investigation, her family made a shocking claim to the media, alleging that she was murdered by individuals from the school after being subjected to rape. This assertion swiftly gained traction, spreading like wildfire across social and digital media platforms. Without waiting for the results of the official investigation or medical reports, the public embraced the narrative of the girl's death as a rape case orchestrated by the school administration.

Despite subsequent medical and police reports disproving the rape allegation, the damage was done. The initial misinformation had already stained the reputations of the school and law enforcement, perpetuating a false belief among the majority of the populace. Tragically, this isn't an isolated incident.

Consider the case of political leader Gagan Thapa, falsely accused of misusing funds intended for a GOAT farm project by PACT Nepal. Despite the organization's public clarification that no funds were mishandled by Thapa, opposing parties and social media activists continued to spread misleading content, tarnishing his reputation.

These examples underscore a broader societal issue exacerbated by the proliferation of digital media and the lack of critical thinking skills. With internet penetration on the rise in Nepal, there’s a pressing need for education on media literacy and fact-checking. Unfortunately, the government has failed to address this challenge, with even leaders engaging in the dissemination of falsehoods for personal or political gain.

In an era where misinformation spreads faster than truth, it’s imperative that we equip ourselves with the tools to discern fact from fiction. Failure to do so not only undermines our collective intelligence but also threatens the very foundations of our society. It’s time to confront this digital epidemic before it irreparably damages our minds and communities.

In examining the spread of false information in our society, let's delve into another compelling example: The case of Durga Prasai, a prominent medical businessman. Prasai has leveled numerous accusations against banking and financial institutions, as well as against a particular business community. This instance sheds light on how digital media not only operates on false information but also actively contributes to the destruction of our societal fabric.

Comparing this case with the previous examples underscores the multifaceted nature of misinformation’s impact. In the first scenario, false information propagated by the family of the deceased girl was mistakenly consumed as truth by the public. Conversely, in the case of Gagan Thapa, the media wrongly portrayed him as guilty, yet opposition parties and social media users accepted this false narrative as reality.

Now, consider the situation involving Durga Prasai. Despite the presence of regulatory bodies like the Nepal Rastra Bank (NRB) tasked with auditing and overseeing banking institutions, Prasai’s allegations hold more sway in the eyes of the public than the assurances of the NRB governor. This phenomenon highlights a disturbing trend: The erosion of trust in established institutions and the elevation of individual voices, even when based on unsubstantiated claims.

The ramifications of this trend are profound and far-reaching. If left unchecked, the proliferation of false information threatens to undermine the very foundations of our society and political system. As trust in institutions wanes and individuals are increasingly swayed by unverified claims, the fabric of governance is weakened, leaving room for manipulation and exploitation.

In confronting this challenge, we must prioritize media literacy, critical thinking, and accountability. Empowering individuals to discern fact from fiction and holding purveyors of false information to account are essential steps in safeguarding our society’s future. Failure to do so risks perpetuating a cycle of misinformation that corrodes trust, distorts reality and undermines the democratic principles upon which our society is built. It’s imperative that we act decisively to stem the tide of misinformation before it irreparably damages our collective well-being.

While reflecting on the evolution of media and its impact on society, we must acknowledge past instances where misinformation led to grave consequences. Cases like Srisha Karki’s, Anuja Baniya’s, and Rasendra Bhattrai’s are poignant reminders of the power and responsibility wielded by the media. In the past, accountable media outlets would promptly retract false information and issue apologies when mistakes were made. There was a sense of responsibility and accountability that ensured the integrity of reporting.

However, in today’s digital landscape, the proliferation of digital devices has given rise to a new breed of threats. Anyone with a smartphone can capture and manipulate images and videos to fabricate damaging narratives. The consequences of such actions are severe: Individuals find themselves at the mercy of viral misinformation, their reputations tarnished irreparably before they can even respond.

Who bears the responsibility for the damage inflicted upon the public image of these individuals? Can they ever fully restore their tarnished reputations in the eyes of society? The wounds inflicted by social media’s weapons of misinformation cannot simply be healed with time. Social media has emerged as a potent weapon in the digital age, capable of inflicting harm without the need for physical violence.

Moreover, alongside misinformation, cybercrime rates are on the rise, as reported by the Nepal Police. The younger generation, deeply entrenched in the digital world, often uncritically consumes information without verifying its authenticity. The lack of a robust fact-checking system in our educational curriculum further exacerbates the issue, leaving individuals vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation.

As we navigate this digital era fraught with misinformation and cyber threats, it’s imperative that we bolster media literacy efforts and integrate fact-checking mechanisms into our education system. Only by empowering individuals to critically evaluate information can we hope to mitigate the damaging effects of misinformation and safeguard the integrity of our society.

Views are personal