Submit your Article

Oasis Tea Industries that was established last year in Suryodaya Municipality, Ilam, has now been closed. The Covid-19 pandemic has not spared even this small tea producer in eastern Nepal.

 The famous tea gardens of the district are lush with new tea leaves. But there is nobody to pick them or package them. Factories are shut. There is no one to take orders or deliver them to the market. Nor is any cargo company operating to take orders and ship the stock abroad.

 “Our importers from abroad are not placing orders. They seem to be in a wait and see mode,” says Jyoti Adhikari, owner of the company.

 The company exported 1,300 kg of tea to France last year. But Adhikari cannot even contact the French importer this year. “They don’t reply to our emails. So how can we start processing tea for this season?” he asks. His company buys fresh leaves from the gardens and processes them for exports.

 “Since we haven’t even cleared last year’s stocks, we cannot buy new leaves this year,” Adhikari adds. “We are short of funds to keep the factory running.” 

 Not only Oasis, most tea factories in Nepal’s 14 districts where tea is grown have been closed due to the corona crisis. Ilam and Jhapa are Nepal’s two biggest tea-producing districts.

 Nepal exports 90 percent of its tea to India. But the Indian tea dealers have already stopped imports due to the spread of the novel coronavirus. Nepal had exported 14.5 million kg tea to India last year, according to National Tea and Coffee Development Board, earning Rs 2.88 billion in the process.

 “Under current circumstances, the first batch of tea leaves will go to waste. This will affect the quality of tea we produce for the rest of the year,” Adhikari says.

Tea producers are worried that they will lose a lot of money with the stoppage of exports. They export the finest and most expensive products. “The leaves we would pick this season would be of the best quality, the ones to attract third-country importers,” says Udaya Chapagain, proprietor of Gorkha Tea Estate.

Nepal’s tea goes to 30 countries including to Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, the UAE, and the US. Nepal had altogether exported 498,596 kg tea to those countries last year, according to the board records.

“If we can’t sell tea, we will be bankrupt. The factories can’t pay back bank loans or bear other expenses,” adds Chapagain.   

Adhikari estimates that the closure will directly affect over 29,000 people across the country whose livelihood depends on the tea industry. 

Factories in Ilam have over 100,000 kilos of tea left over from last year’s stock. “If the corona crisis continues, both the farmers and traders face a very uncertain future,” says Gopal Kattel, secretary of Suryodaya Tea Producers’ Association.

Countries the world over, including Nepal, are opting for lockdowns to contain the spread of novel coronavirus (Covid-19), often with considerable public support. Many governments have assumed emergency powers to do so. This in turn has fuelled fears that rulers with autocratic bent could use the pandemic to cement their rule and silence critics.

For instance, to contain the contagion, Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban has assumed extraordinary powers to rule by decree. The decree, among other things, allows the prime minister the power to control the media. Rights groups warn the country could be headed towards a full-blown dictatorship.

“Around the world, measures to contain the coronavirus are threatening liberal values and basic principles of democracy,” says political analyst Shreekrishna Aniruddh Gautam. “The other tendencies in evidence during the pandemic are further cementing of nationalist sentiments and emboldening of anti-globalization forces.”

In Nepal, some government decisions have already raised eyebrows. It decided to let Nepal Army import essential materials to fight coronavirus, after a private company assigned the duty failed to do so. Why do we need an elected government, many question, if all vital government duties are to be passed on to the army?

Even top leaders of the ruling Nepal Communist Party are unhappy with lack of consultations in dealing with Covid-19 and with the prevalence of security forces on vital national issues, which, they reckon, could threaten civilian supremacy. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli is yet to summon a joint meeting of ruling and opposition leaders, which belies his assertion that the anti-corona measures of the federal government have broad political support.

Missing scrutiny

The government has also stalled the parliament’s winter session, which is known as the bills session. In the absence of parliamentary scrutiny, it can now issue decrees to get things done. The next session of parliament is the budget session. As corona is an urgent issue, the government can summon a special session of parliament before that. And if big gatherings are a problem, the parliament can meet virtually, as is being done in some other countries. The Oli government has thus far refrained from such innovative measures.

Tara Nath Dahal, executive director of Freedom Forum, a think-tank on civil, political and media rights, says he has repeatedly drawn the attention of the Speaker of the federal lower house Agni Sapkota that there should be continuous and consistent parliamentary oversight over government functioning during the pandemic.

“Now, the country is operating on the basis of government decrees. There is also a question-mark over the constitutional validity of the lockdown, even though it maybe justified from a public health perspective,” Dahal says. “It is vital that the parliament continues to function, especially during a national crisis.”

The judiciary can help with check and balance but its functioning too is limited. Currently, all courts (Supreme, High and District) are hearing only urgent cases. Similarly, the National Human Rights Commission, a constitutional rights watchdog, has been almost comatose during the coronavirus lockdown.

In such a void, it is easy for the government to try to accumulate power and suppress dissent, according to Dahal.

Dangerous precedents

Take the recent fiasco with the online news portal Kathmandupress.com. The portal’s developer remotely accessed the website’s backend and deleted an article critical of the prime minister’s advisors. Reportedly, the PM’s inner circle had put pressure on the IT company to delete the article, even though this has not been independently verified.

In another development, Press Council Nepal has blocked over a dozen online news portals on the ground that they were publishing fake news and misleading the public. Though some of those portals did indeed post news of questionable nature, observers say the press council does not have a right to block them, which sets a dangerous precedent. 

In his address to the country on April 7, PM Oli doubled down on critics, arguing that some people were trying to mischievously defame the government even though it was doing a good job in controlling the spread of coronavirus.

Freedom House, a US-based global think-tank, has called on governments across the world to protect civil, political and media rights during and after the pandemic. “Criminal penalties for distributing false information are disproportionate and prone to arbitrary application and abuse. Instead, governments should counter any falsehoods by delivering clear, accurate, and up-to-date information,” advises the think-tank in its guidelines.

But over the past two years, there have been multiple efforts to curtail media freedom in Nepal. Three laws—Media Council Bill, Information Technology Act, and Special Services Act—have provisions that curtail media freedom and civil rights.  

In the name of controlling the pandemic, experts fear governments could also snoop on people’s private information. “China reportedly contained the coronavirus with the help of its overarching surveillance mechanisms,” says Gautam, the political analyst. “One upshot of such sweeping surveillance could be spying on and preying upon the government’s adversaries. This will be a big threat to democracy.”

Naradevi Gurung, 52, who had elevated blood pressure and high fever, died on March 31 after private hospitals in Biratnagar of eastern Nepal refused to see her/ AMN ARCHIVES 

“Every citizen shall have the right to basic health services from the state, and no one shall be deprived of emergency health services,” states Article 35 of the new constitution. Despite the constitutional provision, in reality, there is no assurance of people’s access to even basic health services in many parts of Nepal. After the government announcement of a lockdown to contain the possible spread of the novel coronavirus, the public right to basic health services has been even more restricted. There have been instances of deaths of patients presenting themselves with corona-like symptoms after private hospitals refused to admit them.

This callous behavior of private hospitals and clinics during the coronavirus pandemic has sparked a debate on the kind of health policy the country needs. There are also voices that private hospitals should be nationalized, temporarily during the corona crisis, if not permanently. Spain recently nationalized all its private hospitals and healthcare service providers after they were deemed uncooperative in the country’s fight against the coronavirus. 

Nepal opened its door for private investment in health with the start of the era of economic liberalization in 1990. The National Health Policy 1990 advocated the role of the private sector, and led to the opening of private hospitals and other health related services. Private sector is now involved mainly in two areas of healthcare: first as service providers, and second as producers of medicines and equipment. But has time come to revisit Nepal’s privatization policy?

Regulate, don’t close 

Former multiple-time finance minister and central working committee member of Nepali Congress Ram Sharan Mahat, who is thought of as one of the architects of the new era of liberalization and privatization, says there is no need to rethink the current policy. “It is also untrue that the government has pulled back from the health sector. In the past three decades, there has been rapid expansion of government hospitals in districts and rural areas,” he adds. Since the private hospitals complement rather than compete against government hospitals, they should be better regulated rather than closed, he advises. 

Mahat says those with little knowledge are questioning the rationale behind the privatization of health. “People should get to choose which hospital, private or government, they want to go and get treated. Some may even opt to go abroad for the same purpose. It is their right,” he adds. 

Madhusudan Subedi, a Professor at Patan Academy of Health Sciences, says the issue of rethinking Nepal’s health policy came to the fore mainly after Dr. Govinda KC’s recent campaigns for drastic reforms in the health sector. “The demand for nationalization of private hospitals is emotional and impractical. The problem again is that after 1990 successive governments failed to regulate the health sector properly, and not necessarily that our private hospitals are not working,” he says.  

On the coronavirus pandemic, Subedi says what is missing is coordination between government agencies and private hospitals. “And before accusing them of callousness, the government should provide Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to doctors and nurses in private hospitals. But even the doctors working in government hospital don’t have these basic protective gears,” Subedi says. 

Nay, involve the state

But according to Khagaraj Adhikari, former Health Minister and central committee member of the ruling Nepal Communist Party, this is the perfect time to rethink the post-1990 health policies. “The private hospitals have done some good. But their response to the coronavirus pandemic suggests they will be accountable to the public and the state only when it suits them and not when they are most needed. There is thus a strong rationale for greater government involvement in healthcare,” he says. 

Many private hospitals are also openly flouting set criteria. For instance, they must set aside 10 percent of their total beds for free treatment of the poor and marginalized communities. But according to last year’s Auditor General’s report, most private hospitals are not implementing this provision. Similarly, the facilities they provide to senior citizens are also short of the legal requirements. The same report says private hospitals have not hired the required number of doctors and nurses; nor do they have adequate labs, equipment and beds. 

Says Uma Kanta Chaudhary, another ex-health minister: “The state should be bold. If private hospitals shy away from their responsibly during a health crisis, they should be penalized. Yet it is not just their fault. Traditionally, the Nepali government has also failed to effectively monitor and take action against those who violate rules.” He advises that the private hospitals be made “more service-centric rather than purely business-centric”.
 

The neglected lot 

In the past three decades there has been insufficient investment and effort in improving the state of government hospitals and decentralizing them. Right now they are desperately short on vital staff and equipment, and disproportionately concentrated in urban pockets. 

There are four types of hospitals in Nepal: public hospitals (known as government hospitals), private/NGO hospitals, nursing homes, and medical colleges. Around 700 big and small private medical establishments are in operation, along with 19 medical colleges. In terms of government hospitals, there are three federal level hospitals, seven regional hospitals, and 77 district hospitals, in addition to smaller health and sub-health posts in local units.  

In my personal opinion the only positive to come out of the 2015 earthquakes was that many young people went into different villages around the country for the first time. They saw for themselves how people live in rural areas and hopefully came to realize how privileged they were in their homes in Kathmandu, Pokhara, etc. Where we stand now, it’s hard to see any positives from Covid-19 other than we all know how to wash our hands!

Flippant and ridiculous as it seems, earlier we did not know how to properly wash our hands despite our mothers telling us over and over.  And for decades now development organizations have been pushing hand washing as part as their water and sanitation (WASH) projects in villages and communities around the world. The biggest challenge is that water resources are often limited and most communities have shared water taps.

So it was with interest I learned of an innovative yet simple hand washing station which involves no touching of the water ‘tap’.

A few years ago I met Sonia JM when we both worked on the communications team for Jazzmandu. After a couple of years our paths diverged and it was only recently we bumped into each other again.  Sonia was excited to explain about a low-tech hand washing technique she had come across called Tippy Tap. In these days where washing our hands may save our lives, it seemed too good an idea not to share. 

Tippy Tap is particularly useful at community level where one central tap is used. What about using such a thing outside shops that are currently providing a bucket of water for hand washing before entering?  And when we emerge through this nightmare, it would be an excellent facility for village schools.

Sonia explains further: “I was looking through the Facebook page of a friend who works in Africa and came across Tippy Tap. Wow, I thought to myself. This technology would work so well here in Nepal.” Being that Tippy Taps have worked well at community level during epidemics, including the Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone and in school settings, Sonia says she was surprised they were not being promoted here. And decided to take matters into her own hands (no pun intended).

Just a week prior to the lockdown in Nepal Sonia installed two Tippy Tap washing stations in a project community she is working with through UNOPS HQ and rural based offices of the organization have also been encouraged to set up these washing stations and to promote them to the communities they are working with.  

So what exactly is this great low-tech washing station device?  [JT1] Tippy Taps ensures no one touches any tap since a water-filled container is tipped up to enable hand washing by using your foot to tilt the container.  Soap is hung on a string next to the container. You can even mix disinfectant directly into the water in the container. But Sonia stresses if this is done where children will use it, the soap on a rope is a better idea in case the kids try to drink the water.

Designed and initiated by WaterAid, you can follow the link below to get instructions on how to build a Tippy Tap—which I am told takes only about 30 minutes. Sonia points out that in the longer term “this can lead to long lasting behavioral change in hand washing hygiene and also demonstrate that low cost initiatives can really work. Saves water too!”

Download the super easy instructions from WaterAid here https://www.wateraid.org/uk/sites/g/files/jkxoof211/files/schools-challenge-ks1-tippy-tap-instructions.pdf