Leela Devkota, 38, was returning to her home near Budhanilkantha Temple at around 10:00 on the morning of 14 December 2019. As she was walking on the sidewalk, a grey Suzuki car breached the sidewalk, and ran over her. She was later pronounced dead on arrival at a nearby hospital.
Police investigation showed 21-year-old Prithiva Malla was driving the car—under the influence. In fact, he was completely drunk. The car was full of beer bottles and, reportedly, even illegal drugs. He had three other friends in the car.

The killing of a working mother of three by an inebriated driver created much uproar. The fact that the incident occurred during unusual hours for drunk driving came as a surprise for many. It later turned out that Malla had been out on a drinking spree with his friends for the whole night before the accident.
Nepal Police’s alcohol detection test for drunk drivers, popularly known as Mapase, has been credited for controlling alcohol-induced accidents in the Kathmandu Valley. But the case of Malla throws a different light on this issue.
The record of Metropolitan Traffic Police Department Kathmandu shows reduction in the rate of alcohol-induced accidents until four years ago. But the trend has been reversing in the past three years.
In FY 2016/17, there were 167 drunk-driving accidents, killing seven. The number of accidents rose to 221 in 2017/18 with 11 deaths, and to 283 with 16 deaths in 2018/19. In the first five months of 2019/20, already 237 accidents have been recorded, with four deaths.
Does it indicate waning effectiveness of Nepal Police’s alcohol detection test? Or does it show the alcoholics have found a way out—driving when there is no Mapase test? It is hard to say.
“Improvement is needed in the way traffic police work. Each officer on the street should have at least a breathalyzer to detect alcohol,” says Govinda Bhattarai, road activist and senior advisor at Nepal Automobile Association (NASA), an organization that works for road safety. “There is also no machine to trace other drugs.”
For somebody caught driving under the influence, the punishment is Rs 1,000 in fine, an hour-long road safety class at the traffic police, and a hole punched in the driving license. Five such holes will lead to the license’s suspension. Altogether 444 licenses have been suspended in eight years of the Mapase control campaign.
“The punishment for drunk driving is inadequate,” Bhattarai adds. “And the alcohol test is done only during the evening hours. The alcoholics know when and how to avoid the Mapase tests.”
The traffic police say they have challenges of their own.
“There are several reasons why we have not been able to trace drunk drivers,” said traffic police spokesperson and Superintendent of Police Jeevan Kumar Shrestha. “First, we don’t have enough manpower. Second, it is difficult for us to inspect during the day due to rush hours. Likewise, they might also be using alternate roads where our officers are not on duty.”
Shrestha is aware that there may be plenty of people who drink and drive during daytime.
Nearly every month, a couple of cases of alcohol-related accidents in the daytime are reported, says Jitesh Dahal, an inspector at traffic police. Yet there is no systemic record of the total number of road accidents in the daytime, much less due to alcohol.
“We are doing our job. But the drivers and their families also need to be aware of their roles,” says SP Shrestha. “These days, parents are often uncaring if their children come home drunk. Discipline starts at home. I ask parents to check what their children are doing.”

Taking oath of office on 15 February 2018, Province 1 Chief Minister Sherdhan Rai inducted four ministers in his provincial cabinet. The number was in no way sufficient to staff the provincial government.
There are seven ministries in the province, including the Office of the Chief Minister. Rai has also been looking after the Ministry of Land Management, Agriculture and Cooperatives, as well as the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure, for the past two years. As the chief minister does not have enough time on his hands, crucial works at these ministries have been affected. But cabinet expansion seem unlikely anytime soon.
The four ministries headed by respective ministers have formulated policies and laws to execute their public duties. But those under the chief minister have been left to the discretion of bureaucrats. It has affected public service delivery as the civil servants are unable to formulate laws and policies by themselves.
“The cabinet has failed to expand even in two years. Without its ministers, Province 1 has become like a person without vital organs,” says Bal Bahadur Samsohang, parliamentarian fromthe ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP). “Now even if the ministers are immediately appointed, the two ministries will have to spend a lot of time clearing a two-year backlog.”
Works related to critical sectors such as roads, drinking water, irrigation, energy, transport, agriculture, poverty alleviation, and land management have been affected in the absence of department heads.
“Maybe the delay is due to pressure from the central government. The chief minister is just filling vacancies in these ministries, without evaluating their functioning,” says another parliamentarian, Lila Ballav Adhikari, also from the ruling NCP.
Absence of department heads has also affected capital expenditure. Not only have the concerned bodies failed to spend budgets, there have also been irregularities, claim parliamentarians.

“There are big irregularities in the ministries that are not headed by a minister. An irrigation staffer in Bhojpur district was recently found taking bribe,” says parliamentarian Ushakala Rai, also from the ruling NCP. “As there is no minister to oversee these departments, employees are going their own way.”
According to Dhruba Subedi, press advisor of the chief minister, the issue hinges on a decision of the federal government. “Expansion of provincial government needs federal approval. As the federal government has not given such an approval, cabinet expansion in the province has been delayed,” Subedi says.
Samsohang also criticizes the practice of getting blessings from Kathmandu to be appointed provincial ministers. The provincial government has been unable to function properly as there is interference from the center even in deciding the names of the province and its capital city, lambasts Samsohang. “Federalism seems meaningless if the provincial government cannot appoint its own ministers. We have to take orders from the center on everything, including choosing the name of the province and the capital city. How can we say the country has adopted a federal system?” questions Samsohang 

One conspiracy theory refuses to die. Krishna Bahadur Mahara was supposedly removed from the speaker’s post after he refused to start the process of the mandatory parliamentary ratification of the American MCC accord. The Maoist half of the ruling Nepal Communist Party strongly believes that the MCC is an integral component of the Indo-Pacific Strategy aimed solely at containing the dear northern neighbor’s rise. For his refusal to bow down before the ‘imperialists,’ Mahara had to lose not just his job but also his freedom.
Or so the theory goes. Frankly, I didn’t put much store on it. I still don’t. Sounds farfetched. But then knowledgeable sources keep alluding to it. And to the related issue of the deputy speaker Shiva Maya Tumbahamphe refusing to resign to clear the way for the election of new speaker and deputy speaker. They say this too is closely tied to the parliament’s need to ratify the MCC accord. PM Oli does not want another Maoist speaker as he or she could block the MCC again.
There seem to be two clear camps developing inside the ruling party. One old UML faction under the current prime minister, while still keen on closer ties with China, wants to preserve Nepal’s age-old relations with the US. But the old Maoist faction under Pushpa Kamal Dahal continues to be highly suspicious of the MCC.
Foreign powers have always had a disproportionate influence on Nepali politics. The current crop of top Nepali leaders think they have learned how to play off big powers to their political advantage. Oli used to be India’s point-man in Nepal before he espied an opportunity to ride an anti-India wave to power. Now he is much closer to China. Dahal orchestrated the decade-long insurgency from Indian soil, only to later denounce the ‘expansionists’. After he lost his PM’s post due to ‘Indian meddling’, he once again embarked on a (as yet unfinished) crusade to please the Indians. During the insurgency, the West-friendly Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba hoped to save his premiership by convincing the Americans to ditch their knee-jerk anti-Maoism. He didn’t succeed, but remains a trusted American friend. Thanks to Pradeep Giri, his ties with New Delhi aren’t bad either.
As the internal rift within the NCP deepens, foreign power centers will look to play through their Nepal proxies. Dahal wants to portray himself as the only true friend of China in the NCP. Oli wants to show that he is more than capable of maintaining the delicate balance between the great powers, even as he maintains his warm ties with Beijing. He recently deported 122 Chinese nationals after asking Nepal Police to drop charges against them. This won’t go unnoticed in Beijing. Again, Oli as government head faces different kinds of pressures to Dahal as co-chairman of the NCP. But one long-term trajectory is clear enough: whatever their current inclinations, each sees his future firmly tied to their ability to keep Beijing in good humor. For the Nepali communists, the pro-China nationalist card comes with an indefinite
validity period.

A society that restricts freedom of expression cannot be democratic. True, even in a democracy, you cannot say anything you want. Yet this bar is something set by freely interacting individuals. Whenever governments have tried to arbitrarily set limits on free speech, it has inevitably been for their political benefit, and not for the benefit of the larger society. For once you start setting these limits, it is hard to know where to stop. The federal government in Nepal is thus on a slippery slope.

A slew of bills now in the federal legislature sets a low bar on freedom of expression. If these bills are passed, just about anything written in news­papers or posted online may be deemed problematic, and the content-creator be made liable to the harshest of punishments: 3-5 years of jail or up to Rs 1.5 million in fines.

Under far more permissive laws, many Nepalis have already been arrested for their social media posts that in one way or other were critical of those in the government. There was no need for these new bills.

Federal upper house Nation­al Assembly member Prakash Panta says that with the help of new laws the government could directly interfere with people’s privacy. “Government agencies can even listen to [phone] con­versations between couples,” he cautions. Social media restric­tions could be especially prob­lematic for the young generation who like to freely express them­selves on digital platforms. Many of them may have no idea they are committing a crime. They are not amused. Says 20-year-old Prastuti Bhattarai: “Those in the government should serious­ly get a life instead of behaving like aunties of our community who gossip about things like who someone is talking to, what they are doing, and who are they roaming around with.”

With the proposed laws still in their formative stage and many of their likely targets potentially unaware of their restrictive pro­visions, the government may not face much of an opposition initially. But when people start realizing its true intent, there could be a harsh backlash.

Concerns grow as new bills tabled to curtail freedom of expression

Some provisions of the Nepal Special Service Bill allows the National Intelligence Department (NID) to intercept intercept phone calls, record videos, and track emails of ordinary citizens. As the NID is under the Prime Minister’s Office, such provisions are likely to be used against political opponents. More than that, it violates citizens’ privacy rights ensured by the constitution

But at least three bills that are being deliberated in the House of Representa­tives and the National Assembly of federal parliament clearly go against these consti­tutional provisions by making it difficult for both the media and the ordinary people to exercise the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

The fact that sections of the three laws in the making—the Information and Technology Bill, the Media Council Bill, and the Nepal Special Service Bill—con­tradict the country’s constitution has invited concerns and criticism from multiple quarters.

Some provisions of the Nepal Special Service Bill allows the National Intelli­gence Department (NID) to intercept phone calls, record videos, and track emails of ordinary citizens. As the NID is under the Prime Minister’s Office, such provisions are likely to be used against political opponents.

More than that, it violates citizens’ pri­vacy rights ensured by the constitution. Article 28 of the constitution says: “The privacy of any person, his or her resi­dence, property, document, data, corre­spondence and matters relating to his or her character shall, except in accordance with law, be inviolable.” If the new law is passed, government agencies will have sweeping powers to look into an individual’s document and data.

Timing and intent

When it comes to intercepting phone calls, a former senior official at the NID says that there is international practice of intercepting calls of suspi­cious persons with terrorist links.

“In our case, it could be used in criminal activities. But there is high chance of such provisions being used against political opponents as well,” he says. He further says the NID has never intercepted phone calls. “This is going to be the first time it is being practiced in Nepal. The question is over the intent,” he added.

Says National Assembly member Prakash Panta, “This act permits direct interference in people’s privacy. Now government agencies can hear conver­sations between couples. Emails sent by journalists to their editors will be tracked by government agencies, which could result in pre-censorship.”

After endorsement from the National Assembly, the bill will be forwarded to the House of Representatives for final approval.

Similarly, the Information Technology Bill, which was endorsed by the Develop­ment and Technology Committee of the House, has several provisions that constrain people’s rights to freedom of speech and expression.

Now, the bill will be tabled in full House and is likely to be endorsed as the ruling party has the numbers required. With objec­tion from various quarters, the bill was referred to the committee to incorporate public concerns. But no change was made. The bill, if endorsed, will replace the Elec­tronic Transaction Act that was promulgated in 2008, section 47 of which was often invoked to detain journalists.

The new bill provides for fine of up to Rs 1.5 million and/or five-year imprison­ment for individuals who post contents that sexually ‘harass, bully or defame others.’ Regulation of social media remains a widely discussed issue in European and western countries. In South Asia, such laws are perceived to be guided by an intention of suppressing individual’s right to freedom of speech and expression.

“It seems that political interest was dominant while these laws were formulated to restrict social media. They want to silence the views of the people who criticize the government,” says Tara Nath Dahal, former chairman of the Federation of Nepalese Journalist (FNJ).

Supreme neglect

The National Assembly is deliberating the Media Council Bill to replace the current Press Council Act, 1990. It also has provisions to restrict freedom of speech and expression. “If the Media Council Bill is endorsed as it is, the press council will be like a division of the Ministry of Information and Technology,” Dahal adds.

The FNJ had launched a series of protests against this bill, and the ruling Nepal Communist Party leaders had pledged to address the FNJ’s concerns. But there has been no progress.

The media fraternity has been condemn­ing the government’s lack of commitment to freedom of speech and expression. The Supreme Court, which is mandated to inter­pret the constitution, could questions such contradictory laws. But the court’s constitutional bench that is to look after these issues does not seem to care. The FNJ has taken serious exception to the Media Council Bill. “In the past, ruling party leaders have signed agreements with us not to bring laws compromising press freedom. But the government has often gone back on its own words,” rues Ram Prasad Dahal, secretary at the FNJ. “We are consulting various sections of the society about protesting against those laws.”

International organizations working on media freedom have said that the Informa­tion Technology Bill undermines freedom of expression.

“The controversial bill—passed by the Devel­opment and Technology Committee of the House of Representative (HoR) on Decem­ber 29—threatens freedom of speech online. Among the concerns expressed by Nepali journalist organizations are that it includes provisions to impose fines of up to Rs 1.5 million (over 10.000 €) or jail terms up to five years for posting content on social media that in the eyes of government may pose a threat to the country’s sovereignty, security, unity or harmony,” according to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ).

The bill, if enacted, would replace the exist­ing Electronic Transaction Act that too has been widely misused to arrest and harass citizens for their social media posts. “Accord­ing to the cybercrime cell at Nepal Police, 106 cases were filed in the Kathmandu Valley in the last three years for ’illegal’ posts on social media. This apart, the bill provides for far tougher punishments for committing the same offense on the internet than in person,” the FNJ said.

Gokul Baskota, Minister for Communication and Information Technology

The Information Technology Bill is aimed at stopping cyber bullying. It will help maintain social discipline. Freedom does not mean a society without reasonable restrictions. The pro­visions are also intended at bringing various social media sites under the tax net.

 Anushtup Sherma, 21,
Student

“If someone can see the mes­sages I send over social media platforms, I would contact the police. But if the government itself is involved, what I can do except stop using those plat­forms? Bringing such restric­tive bills is against our funda­mental rights.”

 Aayuska Shrestha, 19,
Student

“There should be a system to notify the government if something suspicious happens in social media and investiga­tion conducted accordingly. This will help maintain right to privacy. The government should look to protect people’s privacy as well as to punish criminals.”

Isha Thapa, 20,
Student, and actor at Fun Revolution TV

“This is the age of democracy and technological advance­ment. People have changed over the years. They are now more aware about their rights, and can think on their own. So it won’t be easy for the gov­ernment to pull off this kind of dictatorial trick.”

Susan Chaudhary, 19,
Student

“I don’t have any problem if the government uses my per­sonal info for some investiga­tion with my consent. I will not accept if they use it for third party advertisement or any other unspecified purpose. If the bill is implemented, people will start speaking carefully.”

Saurav Thapa Shrestha, 23,
General Secretary at Yuwa, a youth-related NGO

“The policy should clarify that whatever I send and receive on social media can be seen only when the content is fishy or for some criminal investigation. But that needs to be done with our permission. There is no clarity on “hate speech”. They must sit with the relevant stakeholders before they finalize and pass the IT bill. Clarity is a must.”

Samiksha Shrestha, 19,
Student

“It’s okay to bring the law to control online contents used to sexually harass, bully, or defame others, and to punish those who are involved. But the same law should not penal­ize users for their private on­line posts. This will curtail their freedom of speech and right to privacy.”

Tebrej Siddiqui, 19,
Student

“The government should check only suspicious messages. Be­yond that it will be difficult to survive as our right to privacy will be violated and we will no longer feel safe.”

Sumikchya Shakya, 19,
Student

“Though this bill can con­trol cyber-crimes, I see many drawbacks as personal data will not remain private. People can misuse this bill for their in­terest. I am against it.”

Prastuti Bhattarai, 20,
Student

“I have been following news on this new bill, and I’m disappoint­ed. I do not trust the government with my privacy and my infor­mation, and I’m sure most Nepalis feel like I do. For instance, I might share my ATM PIN number with my parents in social media and there is no guarantee that people in authority will not abuse the information. Instead of eaves­dropping on someone’s private life, the government should focus on infrastructure development. Those in the government should seriously get a life instead of be­having like aunties of our com­munity who gossip about who is someone talking with, what they are doing, and who are they roaming around with.”