Submit your Article

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

The Opuz v Turkey case provides essential insights for Nepal to combat domestic violence and ensure the protection of domestic violence victims. Nepal can enhance safety for women and marginalized individuals by recognizing its international human rights obligations and establishing/implementing effective legal frameworks. The ruling in the Opuz v Turkey case highlights the vital role of the judiciary in ensuring that the state fulfills its duties, asserting that domestic violence is a human rights violation requiring thorough legal and social action. Nepal can uphold the dignity and rights of all victims through a coordinated effort by enhancing protections, reforming legal structures and changing societal attitudes, reflecting the spirit of the ruling and advancing the struggle against domestic violence.

The case of Opuz v Turkey (2009) is an important decision in human rights law, particularly in relation to domestic violence and the obligations of the state to protect the victims of domestic violence and vulnerable individuals. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruling establishes important precedents that are particularly relevant for countries such as Nepal, where domestic violence is prevalent and state systems frequently fall short in safeguarding the victims. In Nepal, the prevalence of domestic violence is ingrained in cultural norms and entrenched in traditional patriarchal frameworks, thereby fostering a pervasive tolerance for violence targeting women. Despite notable advancements, women often encounter discrimination and violence in familial environments, as societal norms often view domestic violence as a private issue, thereby deterring victims from seeking help. The perpetuation of traditional gender roles and cultural expectations creates a cycle of abuse that renders women voiceless and defenseless due to fear of stigma and retaliation. The Opuz v Turkey case established critical precedents concerning a state’s obligations to protect individuals from domestic violence under the European Convention on Human Rights. The ECtHR emphasized that states bear positive obligations to implement preventive measures when they are cognizant of a real and immediate risk to an individual's life, thereby redefining domestic violence as a matter of public concern rather than a private issue. This ruling acknowledged the grave nature of domestic violence as a violation of human rights and mandated the establishment of effective legal protections and accountability mechanisms. The implications of this judgment have significantly influenced the treatment of domestic violence cases throughout Europe and serve as an essential reference point for legal reforms in countries, such as Nepal, that face analogous challenges.

Although, Domestic Violence (Offense and Punishment) Act- 2009 of Nepal is a major legislative step in the right direction, obstacles to accessing justice, cultural shame, and poor enforcement - all work against the law's efficacy. When seeking assistance, many women face barriers because the legal and law enforcement sectors frequently lack the resources and expertise necessary to provide adequate assistance. According to reports, police officials may reject cases or act biasedly toward women, which encourages a culture of impunity for those who commit crimes against women. Important legal arguments that are relevant to Nepal are highlighted by the Opuz v Turkey case, especially those that deal with the right to life and the outlawing of torture and inhumane treatment. Authorities must acknowledge that it is their responsibility to step in when there is a known threat to a person's life, as victims of domestic abuse in Nepal face serious risks. Protecting victims and making sure their accusations are taken seriously need proactive measures like restraining orders and emergency interventions.

Moreover, the psychological and physical violence experienced by women in Nepal parallels the experiences of the applicant in Opuz v Turkey. The ECtHR’s acknowledgment of domestic violence as a serious violation of human rights underscores the need for Nepal to adopt a similar perspective. It is vital that Nepali law recognizes domestic violence as a public concern that necessitates state intervention. This shift in perception is essential for mobilizing resources and support systems for victims, including easy access to counseling, legal assistance, and shelters. The implications of the Opuz ruling for Nepal are profound, emphasizing the need for enhanced state accountability in cases of domestic violence. This can be achieved through specialized training for law enforcement to handle such cases sensitively and effectively, as well as the establishment of clear protocols for responding to domestic violence complaints.

Strengthening legal frameworks is also critical. In order to ensure adequate protection for victims of domestic abuse within the legal system, a comprehensive review of the existing legislative framework is imperative. It is essential for government officials, lawmakers, legal experts, and women's rights advocates to collaboratively engage in this endeavor. Furthermore, alignment of national legislation with international human rights standards is crucial to prioritize victims' rights and maintain consistent enforcement of laws. Initiatives for community engagement can help advance knowledge of rights and resources, and educational programs in communities and schools can dispel prejudices and foster an environment of equality and respect.

In conclusion, the Opuz v Turkey case offers valuable lessons for Nepal in addressing domestic violence and ensuring the protection of victims. By acknowledging the responsibilities of the state as outlined in international human rights law and enacting robust legal structures, Nepal can strive towards establishing a more secure atmosphere for women and marginalized populations. The judgment highlights the vital importance of judicial systems in ensuring state responsibility, emphasizing that domestic violence constitutes a breach of human rights necessitating thorough legal and societal actions. As Nepal persists in addressing the challenges of domestic violence, drawing insights from the case of Opuz v Turkey provides a valuable chance to enhance its dedication to safeguarding victims and tackling this widespread problem with the necessary promptness.