Submit your Article

During the drafting of the Constitution of Nepal, there was a comprehensive debate about what should be the substance and structure of the National Assembly of the Federal Parliament. That time, there were two schools of thought. One opinion was that the National Assembly should be the subsidiary or subordinate to the House of Representative (Lower House). But the second opinion was fundamentally different. The second opinion was that the National Assembly must be powerful, inclusive and of good quality. But numerically, the first opinion had the majority. So finally, the National Assembly was created in line with the first opinion. Hence our National Assembly was constitutionally made weak and subordinate to the Lower House. Same people have/had the control and influence in Lower House right after Constitution promulgation in two big parties in Nepal. So, they made the National Assembly deliberately weak legally too and made it subordinate to the Lower House while drafting the House Regulations.

When we look upon the content and structure of the Upper House in India, UK and other bi-cameral Houses, we see that the making and breaking of the government is the sole right and responsibility of the Lower House. Presentation of fiscal budget (Finance Bill) is also always done in the Lower House. These two rights, everywhere, are exclusively always reserved for the Lower House. But except these two, all other rights and responsibilities are almost equally divided between the two Houses. This world standard, though, does not comply or match in the context of Nepal. Our Federal Parliament was exclusively made with the main focus on the Lower House and it was deliberate and intentional.

In India, legislative, executive, judicial, electoral, amendment rights and even some special powers were constitutionally given to the Upper House. India is a model of how the Upper House is functioning in a parliamentary democratic country.  In the UK, the Upper House scrutinizes legislation, holds the government to account, and considers and reports upon public policy. Peers may also seek to introduce legislation or propose amendments to Bills.

Where are the faults and weaknesses?

 In Constitution:  Article 111 of the present Constitution creates discrimination and inequality between the two Houses with regard to passing the Bills.

Basically, sub-article (2), (4), (5) and (10) are discriminatory. Sub-article (2) only gives 15 days’ mandatory time to the National Assembly for discussion and sending it back to the Lower House with regard to the Finance Bill.

Sub-article (4) gives the discretionary right to the Lower House and says if the National Assembly does not send it back to the Lower House within 15 days, the Lower House can send this Bill to the Head of State for authentication.

Sub-article (5) gives mandatory two months to the National Assembly to send it back to the Lower House in case of all other normal Bills passed by the Lower House. But it is not vice-versa. Here, the Lower House has the monopoly. The Lower House does not have a time limit. It is an extremely discriminatory provision for the National Assembly.

Sub-article (10) also gives the upper hand to the Lower House. It says if any Bill is under consideration in any House and the Lower House has dissolved or ended its tenure, the Bill will be passive. These are the discriminatory provisions in the Constitution, which need immediate amendment.

Faults and discrimination in the regulation: Clause (6) of the Joint Regulation of the Federal Parliament says that the Speaker will preside over the meetings of the joint House. The Chairman of the National Assembly can only preside over the session if the Speaker is absent. This is not respectful and just to the National Assembly’s Chair. It has to be turn by turn.

Clause (25) of the Joint Regulation is also extremely discriminatory and unjust. It is about the Parliamentary Hearing Committee. There is the provision of a 15-member Committee. There are 12 members from the Lower House and only 3 members from the National Assembly. This is not fair, not representative, not inclusive and undermines the respect, dignity and image of the National Assembly. There has to be at least 5 members from the National Assembly.

 There are two Joint Committees in the Federal Parliament. One is the Parliamentary Hearing Committee and the other is the State’s Directive Principles, Policies and Liability Implementation, Supervision and Evaluation Committee. In eight years of Constitution implementation, members of the National Assembly never got a chance to become the Chair of either committee. This is also a discrimination and domination of the Lower House.

Sub-clause 33(4) of the same regulation is also not fair. It states about the number-ratio of other Joint Committees. The ratio is 1:5—one from the National Assembly but five from the Lower House. The point is that the ratio is unjust.

Sub-clause (44) of the same regulation is also unfair and dominating. It says that, whatever mentioned in the Joint Regulation, all activities take place accordingly. But whatever is not mentioned, will be done as per the provision of Lower House’s Regulation. This has established the supremacy of the Lower House over the National Assembly.

First and foremost, the mindset of political leadership, government and media should be changed in regard to the National Assembly. They do not pay much attention and importance to the National Assembly. The reason is that it has no role in making or breaking a government. They have only a little knowledge about the role and responsibilities of the Upper Houses of other countries. Parties are also sending cadres to the National Assembly, who are less qualified and less competent.

In conclusion, Nepal's National Assembly faces challenges rooted in its constitutional framework and parliamentary regulations, leading to a subordinate status compared to the Lower House. Discriminatory provisions in the Constitution and Joint Regulation undermine the role and representation of the National Assembly. To address these issues, there's a need for constitutional amendments to ensure equality between the two houses and a shift in mindset among political leaders, government, and media to recognize and respect the importance of the National Assembly in the country's governance. This would promote a more balanced and effective bicameral system in Nepal. Hence to make our National Assembly more powerful, inclusive, democratic, effective and of better quality and of world standards, we have to amend the Constitution, change the House Regulations as well as the mindset. 

The World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors today approved an $80m development policy credit for Nepal to strengthen the stability of the financial sector, diversify financial solutions, and increase access to financial services.

The third Finance for Growth Development Policy Credit aims to improve the functioning of the financial sector to support private sector-led growth. The operation will strengthen the supervision of the banking and insurance sectors in Nepal and foster financial product innovations in capital, insurance, and disaster risk markets. The operation will also increase financial inclusion through digitalization, enhanced credit infrastructure and improved financial literacy, with a focus on women entrepreneurs.

“This project supports Nepal’s green, resilient, and inclusive development and will help create an enabling environment for private investment to contribute to Nepal’s economic growth, particularly benefiting the poor and vulnerable,” said Faris Hadad-Zervos, World Bank Country Director for Maldives, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. 

The operation also supports Nepal’s climate agenda by, for example, enhancing supervision of climate risks by requiring disclosures of climate-related risks and impacts of the banking sector portfolio; introducing risk-informed pricing for insurance products, including climate risks; establishing a framework for the issuance of green bonds; and integrating climate-related mitigation and adaptation commitments into credit guarantee products.

“This operation supports the government’s transformative financial sector reform agenda to promote private sector-led growth. The reforms in banking, insurance, and capital markets are instrumental for the sector’s resilience and the critical role it plays to enable private capital mobilization,” stated Tatsiana Kliatskova, World Bank task team leader for the project.

A research recently published by Christopher K Colley for the Stimson Center, an American think tank, nudged me to contemplate doing something I have never done before: Write a piece on foreign policy centered on Nepal from the perspective of Beijing. 

The paper, The Emerging Great Game Chinese, Indian and American Engagement in South Asia, is interesting, though not much in terms of its quite narrow and limited recommendations on how the USA can better counter the existing regional dynamics over the region. 

Instead, it is of great value for its fairly balanced analysis of what China, India and the USA have been doing (or not doing) in order to assert their positions in Kathmandu and Dhaka. 

Colley, an assistant professor of International Security Studies at the United States Air War College, highlights how ably China has been capable of outpowering its two big rivals in Nepal.

At the same time, the author, quite correctly, underscores that it has not been entirely all smooth sailing for Beijing. 

China has been overtly perceived to favor the leftist parties, which recently formed a new coalition, a tactic that can often backfire.

Indeed, the political instability in Kathmandu and the overall volatility of national politics is at least partially induced by the same game that Beijing learned so ably from other foreign powers jockeying for influence in Nepal. 

And it is a sort of chain reaction: As China steps up its game, more push backs and initiatives are put in place by its rivals to offset its increasingly more vocal foreign policy in Nepal. 

But connectivity and infrastructure are the elements that have been so central to Beijing’s approach to both Nepal and Bangladesh (and by extension to the entire world) and that have been distinguishing it from other big players. 

We need to give credit to Beijing that the Belt and Road Initiative is certainly very ambitious, perhaps even too much. 

Symbolically speaking, the BRI has been extremely important because it offered a clear vision of a future based on connectivity and with it comes a very clear and eye-catching narrative. 

No matter the confusion attached to the BRI, what really counts is that the Chinese were able to portray it as a game-changer initiative that is still unmatched by other geopolitical rivals. 

At the same time, though, concrete results and benefits on this front, as Colley explains, are mostly still to be seen on the ground in both nations. 

In this regard, it is still remarkable that Kathmandu and Beijing have not signed the implementation framework of the BRI as yet.  

India has been trying with its Look East Policy but, beyond the fact that it has never been focused on Nepal, the initiative is more like a strategy rather than a concrete, tangible initiative like the BRI.

The EU Global Gateway Initiative not only was designed very lately and it is still in its infancy, it’s still very far from being relevant and certainly did not make a mark in Nepal 

The USA does not have any infrastructure programs in the region. Unless we consider the highly complex and possibly impractical India-Middle East-Europe-Economic Corridor (IMEC) signed last year during the India G20, it is a joint venture with the European Union and seven other countries. 

Considering the unrivaled level of connectivity projects China aims to build in Nepal, Beijing should do a much better job in terms of outreach. 

Students, civil society and think tanks in Nepal should be engaged to better explain not only the BRI but also the more recently launched Global Civilization Initiative that still remains a mystery for many observers. 

This public outreach will probably be met with similar attempts by the USA and India while I am not entirely confident that the EU can be up to playing this game. 

China could also get out of its comfort zone and explain its human rights approach.

It knows, in advance, that the primacy of economic rights, a cornerstone of China’s official policies, can be relatively well received here but with some caveats. 

On the one hand, the Chinese model of top-down governance centered on effectiveness of policies and quick delivery of results can easily find admirers in Nepal, a country plagued by ineffective governance. 

On the other hand, in a nation that fought tooth and tooth for its freedoms in its decades-long quest for democracy, not once but multiple times, the same argument of the primacy of economic rights over political and civil liberties won’t go very far nor persuade the majority. 

Even a much more proactive PR and public engagement with the citizenry of the country won’t be enough. 

Such activities should also be matched by what really matters: A change in substance in China’s overall approach to Nepal and by extension, in the way it traditionally deals with developing nations around the world. 

It is now crystal clear that the Nepali side has been quite skillful at pushing back in terms of terms and conditions that Beijing has been offering for the BRI projects.

A country like Nepal, often portrayed as a weak nation, has been doing a masterful job at asserting its own strategic interest in its relationships with China.

So, if China really wants a breakthrough with Kathmandu, it has to show a much higher level of flexibility on how the BRI can be rolled out. 

It needs to accept the key terms, quite reasonable if you think about it, that Nepal is demanding: Grants and very nominal interest rates on the loans that it needs to take. 

Beijing should be much more effective and persuasive at explaining how it can really be transformative for Nepal to have a direct railways connection with its southern borders.  

Considering the staggering sums involved and the sheer complexity of the undertaking, it is obvious that Kathmandu does not want to incur huge debts.

Could Nepal offer China a new template on how to deal with the world, a much less rigid one and more attuned to the needs of the recipient nations? 

The Dragon Boat race on the occasion of the Chinese New Year was a big boost for the image of China in the country.

Yet it is not nearly enough to dispel some of the concerns that many harbor toward Beijing. 

It would not be surprising if an increasing number of people in Nepal start showing some annoyance toward China using the same heavy-handed approach that New Delhi has been, for so long, accused of. 

For sure, Nepal does not need neither big brothers nor big sisters. 

It needs reliable partners that, while overtly and covertly pursuing their strategic interests, also allow Nepal to play the same game by maximizing its own national priorities.

This means to be okay with the fact that Kathmandu might also and, very respectfully, say “no” to them as they do not align with its core interests . 

Accepting this new reality means that Nepal is growing and moving steadfastly toward becoming a developed nation, a country that is not afraid of exerting its own sovereign interests. 

It will also imply that its core partners have been effective at fulfilling what should be their primary mission in Nepal: Helping the nation to stand more confidently and more ambitiously on its own feet. 

The author writes about politics, human rights and development in Nepal and the Asia-Pacific

During Japanese Foreign Minister Kamikawa Yoko’s one-day Nepal visit on Sunday, the two sides discussed pressing global and regional issues.

According to Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japanese foreign minister and Nepal’s foreign minister Narayan Kaji Shrestha held a candid exchange of views on regional affairs, including the situation in East Asia and South Asia, and concurred on maintaining close communication between the two countries.

The two ministers also held a candid exchange of views on global issues, including strengthening of the functions of the UN, including the Security Council reform, the rule of law, and nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, the Japanese ministry stated in a press release.  Minister Yoko stated that the concept of Women, Peace and Security (WPS) is becoming ever more important amidst increasing uncertainty in the international community, and that Japan would like to further strengthen cooperation in the area of WPS in the future. In response, Minister Shrestha said Nepal would like to maintain cooperation on global issues, including WPS. 

Minister Yoko also conveyed the message to Nepali leaders that Japan would like to work together for the development of Nepal and for peace, stability and prosperity in the region through practical cooperation.

Enhancing people-to-people relationships was another issue that two sides discussed during the visit. Currently, over 170,000 Nepalis, including many exchange students, are living in Japan. The issue of sending more Nepali workers to Japan also figured in the meeting.

In the meeting with PM, Minister Kamikawa also stated that Nepal's sustainable development contributes to the stability of the region and that Japan would continue to cooperate in Nepal’s efforts for sustainable development through development cooperation such as the Nagdhunga Tunnel Construction Project. 

The two ministers concurred on cooperating to further promote mutual understanding and friendly bilateral relations through the establishment of a preparatory committee in both countries to consider initiatives befitting the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations in 2026, as well as the “Human Resources Development Scholarship Program” (JDS), a grant aid program for training young administrative officials. The two ministers also concurred on promoting people-to-people exchanges through Specified Skilled Workers and tourism.

In the heart of Kirtipur is a place of hope and compassion. Baby Life Home and Saphalta HIV Shikshya Sadan, a non-profit organization founded by Raj Kumar Pun in 2011 and 2012, serves as a shelter, care center, and educational institution for children infected with HIV in Nepal. The organization provides children not only with basic necessities like food, shelter, and medical care but also education and emotional support.

Led by Pun, the 41-year-old founder and chairperson, the team consists of seven members. Uma Gurung serves as the founder vice president. “Before establishing this organization, we were all involved in different professions. I was a teacher. Others were engaged in businesses or had steady jobs,” says Pun. Despite their diverse backgrounds, they shared a common passion—they wanted to work for the marginalized community and make a positive impact in society.

The concept of Baby Life Home took shape over 15 years ago when Pun came across a daily newspaper headline ‘HIV-infected children in trouble’. Moved by a deep sense of empathy and a desire to help these children, Pun embarked on a mission to provide assistance. Along with his team, he traveled to Dang, intending to provide basic necessities such as food, clothing, and stationery supplies. But what they encountered there was something they could have never imagined.

Upon arriving at the shelter, Pun and his team witnessed a heartbreaking reality. “The children’s families and relatives were mistreating them. Other children weren’t allowed to play with them. It was heartbreaking,” says Pun. The seeds of Baby Life Home were thus planted. Pun wanted to give these children a loving home. He wanted them to have a safe space.

However, the journey was challenging. No one wanted to rent out their homes to them due to the many misconceptions they had about HIV transmission. So, they created a temporary shelter at Gurung’s residence. Later, Pun decided to keep the children in a house he had bought for his parents. “We started the shelter with four children and the number had gone up to ten by that time,” he says.

Many schools were hesitant to admit the children due to fears of stigma and discrimination. “Initially, we believed that providing proper medical care would enable our children to be accepted into any school. But this assumption proved wrong as neither private nor government schools were willing to take them in,” says Pun.

Their decision to start Saphalta HIV Shikshya Sadan was born out of this reality. They wanted a nurturing and inclusive learning environment where HIV-infected children could thrive academically, socially, and emotionally. Saphalta HIV Shikshya Sadan is Nepal’s first school and orphanage to openly support education for HIV-infected children without concealing their HIV status, ensuring their right to education in a caring environment.

In addition to being infected with HIV, many children at Baby Life Home also suffer from various other diseases and health conditions. Some have heart diseases, while others suffer from epilepsy. “We have never solicited donations specifically for medical purposes. While money is important, we are grateful when people willingly contribute, donate food, or celebrate special occasions with us. We graciously accept such contributions,” says Pun.

To manage the children’s condition, Baby Life Home procures Antiretrovirals (ARVs) from Teku Hospital which provides them free of cost to meet the needs of HIV-infected children. These medications, donated by the World Health Organization to the Nepali government, are acquired according to the specific requirements of each child ensuring that they receive the appropriate dosage and combination of medicines tailored to their medical needs. Each child’s treatment is carefully monitored, with regular assessments of effectiveness to ensure optimal outcome.

Recognizing the challenges and trauma these children face due to their health condition and societal stigma, at Baby Life Home, counseling plays a crucial role. “Life is transient, and people don’t only die from HIV/AIDS. So, it’s not worth worrying too much about death. Instead, we should strive to live our lives to the fullest, enjoying each moment,” says Pun “Even though we may not have given birth to them, we are their parents and we want to provide them with the life they deserve.”

Pun has a double masters’ degree in sociology and political Science, demonstrating his commitment to understanding the complexities of society and governance. He has also completed a CMA (Community Medicine Assistance) degree, further enhancing his understanding of healthcare and medical issues, particularly in the context of HIV/AIDS.

Pun is thankful for the government’s assistance. “Our former prime minister, K P Oli, came to know about the organization and created a substantial fixed deposit for us. We are able to use the interest generated from this deposit for the children’s medication and basic needs,” he says. Additionally, the government has granted them access to Social Security Allowance as well.

Pun believes there is more the government can do for the welfare of HIV-infected children in Nepal. It’s important to raise awareness and dispel myths and misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, he says.

Pun’s dedication has turned out to be fruitful. The organization is currently providing services to over 100 HIV-infected children—a testament to the power of compassion and community driven initiatives. Some of the children are studying to become doctors, while others have graduated with degrees in arts and social work. This, Pun believes, is a testament to the resilience and determination of these children, who despite adversity continue to pursue their dreams and ambitions with unwavering courage.

The Nepal-India border in Siraha district will be closed for eight days in two phases, due to the upcoming Loksabha elections in the neighboring Indian state of Bihar.

The elections are scheduled to take place in two phases: on May 7 and May 20.

As per directives from the District Administration Office in Siraha, transit points will be closed 72 hours before each election date.

Consequently, the border areas will be inaccessible from Saturday midnight until May 7 for the first phase and from midnight on May 17 until May 20 for the second phase.

Around two months ago, a meeting between Nepal-India security officials concluded that the Thadhi, Bariyapatti, and Madarana points along the Nepal-India border in Siraha would be closed during the Loksabha polls in Madhuwani district of Bihar, according to Assistant Chief District Officer Naresh Kumar Yadav.

Nepal is already caught in the geopolitics of great power competition, and we cannot escape from it. The only option left for us is building our capacity to deal with the fast-changing geopolitical situation. There is a national consensus that Nepal should use the current situation as an opportunity to advance its economic interests. Foreign and geopolitical experts, including this scribe, often wonder whether we have built our capacity to deal with the complex, uncertain, and chaotic world. In one way or another, Nepal is already bearing the brunt of increasing geopolitical tensions. The pressing issues that the global community is confronting are growing tensions between the US and China, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, Taiwan tension, the Middle East crisis and the impacts of climate change. The impact of those issues in Nepal is evident in the conduct of foreign policy, the economy, and to some extent, the domestic political landscape. Over the past few years, we have already become hostages of indecision, ill-decisions, delayed decisions, or fractured decisions on important bilateral, regional or global issues.

To deal with the complex geopolitical situation and other global issues, Nepal needs to pay serious attention to strengthen the existing mechanisms and create new structures, if required. First, it needs to make the existing mechanisms effective. Second, it needs to work out whether it needs new mechanisms. Third, there should be effective and timely coordination among the key state institutions. 

Let's begin with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA). The ministry has 10 divisions covering all countries, regional and global organizations. However, these divisions fall short of human resources and expertise to deal with global issues, given the workload of all divisions. The creation of divisions is based on geography, not issues. Like in many other countries, there are no think tanks within the ministry to support its functioning. Nor is MoFA tolerant or positive about the government think-tank, the Institute of Foreign Affairs (IFA). MoFA officials have yet to realize the importance and role of think-tanks. They think, since they are involved in all bilateral, regional and multilateral negotiations, they have first-hand information on all issues and do not require inputs from any think-tanks. That is why, for a long time, the IFA has been left totally paralyzed.

And it is because of this hubris, the units within MoFA have failed to produce in-depth reports on important bilateral and regional issues. Take the examples of America's Indo-Pacific Strategy and China's Belt and Road Initiative. There has been no serious research and studies on either of these. As MoFA has not developed its capacity, other ministries and departments cannot take its support. Based on conversations with government officials, this scribe can conclude that there is a vague understanding of these issues among them, and they are facing difficulties in taking decisions. There is another side to the story too; there is a lack of independent experts and scholars who can conduct in-depth study and research on what Nepal's position should be in the changing geopolitical situation. There are some non-government think-tanks doing research, but government agencies and officials do not take them seriously due to their poor quality.

The underlying problem is that there is a serious flaw in the appointment of the foreign minister. Those who have at least some idea about foreign policy or geopolitics should be appointed foreign minister. On the one hand, the tenure of foreign ministers is usually short, while on the other, it takes several months for them to grasp the basic knowledge of how MoFA functions and what the key issues are. Foreign embassies or permanent representatives are one of the important wings of the ministry. However, they are almost dysfunctional. Barring some exceptions, Nepal is sending inexperienced, low-profile politicians as its ambassadors to key global capitals such as New Delhi, Washington and Beijing. 

There are some basic problems with ambassadors appointed on political quotas. First, they lack knowledge of the basics of how diplomacy works. Second, they usually do not cooperate with their respective division at the ministry; they do not even feel comfortable reporting to the foreign secretary. They work directly with the foreign minister or the prime minister. Whereas, career ambassadors have the tradition of not taking decisions out of fear of being dragged into controversy. That is why they confine themselves to day-to-day administrative tasks. There is, therefore, a need for a complete overhaul in the functioning of the ministry and its units.

Another equally important issue is the lack of cooperation between state mechanisms, mainly the Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers (OPMCM). Currently, there is a lack of coordination between OPMCM and the Foreign Minister. In some cases, the OPMCM takes decisions without consulting or informing MoFA. One example of this is the appointment of ambassadors. There is also a lack of coordination between the foreign ministry and other ministries. In principle, all decisions and communication related to foreign policy should be conducted through MoFA, but this is not happening. At the same time, there is a lack of consultation between MoFA and security agencies. Not only is there a lack of coordination among ministries, but there is also a lack of coordination between MoFA, and provincial and local governments.

Experts have been raising this issue for a long time. But political leaders do not take these issues seriously because they are wielding foreign policy to advance their party and personal interests. If all the activities and processes are made transparent, they fear losing the privilege of making secret deals or appeasing others to remain in power. This is why they usually do not want to include MoFA officials in talks with other countries, except in formal delegation-level meetings. At the same time, Nepal seriously lacks capable human resources to deal with the complex geopolitics. This should be our priority issue although it may not be a priority issue for our politicians. Our politicians should realize that they alone cannot handle foreign policy in this complex geopolitical situation. Politicians may have certain issues with the foreign ministry, but there cannot be its replacement. They, however, have all rights to restructure it.

Nepal suffered a 76-run defeat at the hands of West Indies ‘A’ in the third match of five matches held at the TU Cricket Ground in Kirtipur on Wednesday.

Chasing the target of 288 runs, Nepal were bowled out for 151 in 19.2 overs, losing all the wickets.

For Nepal, Karan KC scored 28 of 17 balls hitting three fours and one six, Lokesh Bam 28 off 29 balls with one boundary and two sixes in 29 balls, Kushal Malla 20, Binod Bhandari 19 and. Anil Shah, 14. However, other batters failed to score in double digits.

Earlier, West Indies won the toss and decided to bat first and scored 227 runs in allotted 20 overs at the cost of three wickets.

For the team, Johnson Charles hit beyond the century as he recorded 119 off 61 balls with 13 boundaries and seven sixes.  Andre Fletcher scored 53 off 33 balls with four boundaries and three sixes. Fabian Allen made 19, Alick Athanaze 17 and Keemo Paul was not out with 13.

Nepal's Karan KC and Sagar Dhakal took one wicket each. 

In the ongoing T20 series comprising five matches in total, Nepal lost two matches and won one.  

Nepal won the opening match by four wickets while lost the second with 10 runs and third with 76 runs. The fourth match will take place tomorrow, Thursday.

Nepal currently has 20 protected areas (PAs) stretching from the lowland Tarai to high mountains comprising 12 national parks, six conservation areas, one wildlife reserve, one hunting reserve, and 13 buffer zones—the PAs cover about 23.39 percent of the country. Despite covering only 0.1 percent of the global area, Nepal contributes to 3.2 percent and 1.1 percent of the world’s flora and fauna. Undoubtedly, the PAs significantly support floral and faunal biodiversity and cultural and religious heritages within the areas. But is it enough?

A study by the National Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences revealed that many of the world's mammal species are at risk of extinction due to inadequate protection within the existing global network of PAs. Researchers examined nearly 4,000 land-based and non-flying mammal species residing in PAs and discovered that many of them are situated in habitats too small or poorly connected for the animals to flourish. The highest concentration of underprotected species was observed in regions known for their rich biodiversity, such as South, Southeast, and East Asia; Latin America and the Caribbean; Africa; and Oceania. To effectively conserve biodiversity, the suggestion of essential expansion of both the size and quantity of PAs while enhancing their connectivity. The expansion of Bardia National Park (BNP) in the 1980s has contributed significantly to increasing the number of Royal Bengal Tigers to 125 (Tiger Census 2022) in Nepal. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of locating PAs strategically and managing them with a comprehensive understanding of the habitat requirements of the animals. Amidst conflicting land use policies, limited financial resources, and pressures for resource extraction is the expansion of PAs in Nepal possible though?

Even though the establishment of PAs in Nepal seems right from a conservation point of view, it does come with a hefty amount of issues; especially indigenous rights. In the past, local communities had unrestricted access to areas that are now designated as PAs, resulting in their loss of access to resources essential for their livelihoods. As these areas became subject to legal regulations, people found themselves excluded from their traditional use of natural resources. This exclusion has led to increased illegal activities within protected areas, such as poaching and unauthorized logging. Furthermore, local communities often lacked access to compensation for damages caused by wildlife or protected animals.

Due to various movements and negotiations, some indigenous communities have been successful in claiming their rights back from the PAs. Fisherfolks residing on the banks of the Narayani River gained fishing rights in 1999 after years of protest against Chitwan National Park (CNP) whereas poor local women of the Sardar community gained access to harvesting Pater—a thick grass used in making handmade mattresses on a seasonal basis from Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWLR) are few of the instances. So, does this mean the expansion of the number of PAs is possible as long as the rights are provided?

Although the recent policies and practices of PAs have provided some recognition of indigenous rights and roles, there are still huge gaps in proper policy implementation. Not all indigenous communities are on the receiving end of the fishing licenses; but rather at the mouth of harassment, discrimination, and death especially in the lowlands. The regulation of the CNP eliminates Majhis from the traditional fishing communities, the 1996 Bardia National Park (BNP) Regulation allows Bote, Darai, Kumal, and Tharu communities to obtain fishing licenses for a fee of Rs 100 under the condition of using only fishhooks and in 2018–2019, CNP halted new fishing licenses for the Bote community to protect aquatic life. Regulations in Nepal lack meaningful participation and respect for Indigenous Peoples' rights, including free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC). Government efforts to include marginalized groups often face skepticism, perpetuating a cycle of discrimination and hindering equitable development for Indigenous Peoples, particularly women and girls. Between 1 Jan 2020, and 24 June 2021, CNP documented 22 cases of harassment, abuse, and torture, affecting 139 indigenous men, and 397 indigenous women. Notably, all incidents involving women occurred while gathering vegetables and ghongi, a traditional Tharu dish, within the park. In KTWLR, a woman who had delivered a baby just 13 days earlier was instructed to perform Uth-Bas (sitting down and rising) 100 times upon entering the protected area to gather fodder for her goats.

The present scenario of discrimination, harassment, and even death of indigenous communities in and around PAs demotivates the expansion of PAs. Because it seems as if the PAs in Nepal are just about floral, faunal, and not people. Rather, the efforts to rehabilitate indigenous rights, if not reinstate them completely, should be pursued and new mechanisms of collaboration in terms of policy making should be implemented. In the Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP), Gurung and Thakali communities collaborate with conservation authorities to manage resources sustainably, preserving biodiversity while promoting community-based tourism initiatives that benefit local livelihoods. Instead of focusing on the expansion of PAs, shifting the focus to indigenous rights within PAs is important as findings suggest that PAs with the active involvement of Indigenous peoples in management and decision-making show better outcomes in conservation and human rights protection.

Currently, we stand at the crossroads of shifting global alliances, new forms of global power competition, polarity among the traditional and emerging power centers, and the rise of multi-polar world order. The Indo-Pacific region is increasingly becoming the hotspot of the global power contest. South Asia, as one of the growing economic centers, with one-fourth of world population, and the unprecedented rise of China and India, has become the epicenter of global power rivalry.

In this broader geopolitical landscape, Nepal, situated between these two major rivals, is dragged into the power contest of its neighbors. Nepal should carefully navigate the interest of foreign powers and should be able to leverage its geo-political position to realize its agenda of prosperity. Although it is a challenging task, it provides us with ample opportunities.

Formulating proactive foreign policy and smart diplomatic dealing is essential to maximize our national interests. We are clear on isolating ourselves from any strategic, security or military alliances, but we welcome development partnerships that do not undermine our national interests. Now coming to the topic of today’s discussion, we see BRI as an opportunity to materialize our developmental goals, but there are specific issues of concern with the BRI.

China is a long-standing bilateral partner, and one of the countries with strong historic trade, commerce and people-to-people ties. We envision deepening ties with China on mutually beneficial terms. Nepal became a part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative in 2017.

The initial motivation for joining BRI was the prospect of trade and connectivity diversification. However, seven years after signing the MoU, there has been no significant progress on BRI. As the chairman of the International Relations and Tourism Committee of the parliament, I advocate partnerships with any countries to realize our investment needs, but the partnership should be transparent and it should not undermine our sovereignty and should be a win-win situation. With the growing pressure for the BRI implementation plan agreement, we should first have a comprehensive discussion on the provisions of the BRI MoU signed in 2017, which is not yet disclosed by both the governments. The MoU should be brought and discussed in the parliament. And then, we can move onward with the discussion on implementation modality of the projects under the BRI. For this there is a need for national consensus and wider discussion on the modality of partnership under BRI. We have a lot to learn from the global experience of the BRI.

We should be clear on the stance of the financial modality to fund the BRI projects. We cannot simply accept the commercial loans with high interest rates from China with shorter payback periods. Our negotiation with China should focus on grants and concessional loans with interest rates at par with other multilateral financial institutions and should not have any strings attached. The selection of projects under the BRI should be based on comprehensive feasibility study and cost benefit analysis. We should refrain from any projects without economic viability.

There are also concerns on procurement process, financial audit of the investments and construction modality of projects. The projects should be open for bidding to all interested companies globally, Nepal should have the right to conduct financial audits of the projects under BRI. Meanwhile, projects should also procure local resources, manpower and should be able to transfer technology to ensure sustainability of the projects. At the same time, we should consider the environmental and social sustainability of the projects. To ensure this, there should be wider consultations with the multiple stakeholders and detailed study to ensure projects are environmentally, socially viable and do not underestimate the rights of local ethnic communities. I am hopeful Nepal could benefit from the partnership under BRI if China is willing to accommodate our concerns and negotiate on mutually favorable terms. I also urge the Nepal government to clarify the current status of negotiation on BRI and developments in the process. 

The author is head of parliament’s international affairs committee

Invasive species are non-native species that spread or expand their range, potentially harming  the aspects of the environment including the ecosystem and human health. They are one of the five major threats to the biodiversity in Nepal. Lantana Camara is one of such invasive species, which needs to be seriously researched and managed to keep the implication of the species to  biodiversity and food security within the manageable threshold.  

The native range of Lantana Camara is tropical America that ranges the countries of central  and South America as well as Mexico and the Caribbean. Today, the shrub has spread over  to nearly sixty countries and naturalized, causing a negative influence on the forest, grassland  and agricultural field and was listed as one of the world’s 100 worst alien species in 2013. They  were initially brought to India by the British around 200 years ago as an ornamental plant at the National Botanical Garden, which then spread and became invasive. From there, the species  spread widely in Asia including Nepal.  

Lantana Camara is one the worst invasive species in Nepal. The species is known as Ban Fanda or Banmara (Ban-Forest; mara-killer) in Nepali. It can withstand a range of climatic conditions  and is frequently observed in many sections of Nepal, with elevations ranging from 100 to 1950 meters in diverse arrays of habitats including boundaries of fields, grasslands, and forests.  

This plant reproduces vegetatively or by seeds, which are readily dispersed by birds, other  animals that eat the fruit, its branches take root after coming into contact with soil, it is fire tolerant and it has a high phenotypic plasticity. They can grow up to six feet, the branches contain small thorns, stems are square and may have tiny prickles, leaves are simple, hairy, and have a  strong unpleasant odor when crushed. The plant produces green berry-like drupe seeds which  after maturity turn to dark purple and are eaten by birds and animals. It`s extensive seed  production favors rat populations. Flowers are multicolored that may be white to pink, yellow  to orange to red, or may change colors over time. 

This invasive species thrives in jungle areas with no natural predators even if there are no herbivores or insects to be attacking them which means that unless this plant is physically  uprooted or cut away there is no way to control it. Its widespread distribution is causing a global  rise in numbers, limiting the growth of native plants. Its capability for rapid reproduction and  allelopathic exclusion of other plant species allows it to develop dense monospecific stands,  which can drastically lower soil fertility, and allelopathic alteration of soil properties which 

decline the agricultural system productivity and have a detrimental effect on the biodiversity  of the invaded areas. 

It has the potential to block succession and cause the displacement of native species. It can  cause striking changes in the structural and floristic composition of natural communities by  interrupting the regeneration processes of other native species thus reducing species richness.  In light of potential global change scenarios, various authors have projected the present and  future distributions of L. camara. 

Uses  

Lantana camara, despite being an invasive species, have some benefits as well. Owing to their  attractive color, they are highly used as ornamental plants. Furthermore, many communities  across the globe use them as a medicine for various diseases including ringworm, headache, aerodontalgia, malaria, fever, rheumatoid arthritis, cuts, wounds, cough, and cold. Lantana  camara is proven to have a range of medicinal properties including antimicrobial, antioxidant,  antipyretic, larvicidal, and antifungal effects. The chemical makeup of the entire L-plant and its potential medical uses have been extensively researched and investigated by scientists and  researchers worldwide during the past few decades. It is also recognized as a plant that yields  essential oils, which are sold in stores under the name ‘lantana oil’.

There have been efforts to engage local communities of Tamil Nadu, India to make the furniture  from the species through a Lantana Project. The program can be replicated in Nepal as well.  Stems of Lantana can be used to make particleboard, dusted wood, toys, artisanal products such  as carrying cages for chickens and other items.  

Control measures 

To control Lantana Camara different stakeholders have implemented diverse control measures  including the public awareness about the adverse effects of invasive species in forest and  physical control through continuous uprooting and cutting until the clear cut out. Mechanized  equipment like tractors or electric saws may be employed in such high-density zones. Promoting conservation and natural regeneration involves early detection of invasive species  like L. camara and immediate removal at the initial stage. This proactive approach aims to  prevent the spread of the species and encourage the growth of native vegetation. The control  efforts are not limited to forested areas alone; they also extend to roadsides and private lands.  

Way forward

The invasion of Lantana camara in Nepal poses significant ecological and economic  challenges, but concerted efforts are underway to mitigate its impact. Through collaborative  initiatives and innovative management strategies, stakeholders are striving to raise public  awareness, prevent further spread, and restore native ecosystems. While the threat of invasive  species remains daunting, there is reason for optimism. The resilience and ingenuity of local  communities, coupled with advancements in research and technology, offer-promising avenues  for addressing this pressing issue. By harnessing the potential of Lantana camara for medicinal  and economic purposes, we can turn a problem into an opportunity, empowering livelihoods  and promoting sustainable practices. As we navigate the complex interplay between human  activities and ecological systems, let us remember that our actions today will shape the world  of tomorrow and let us remain steadfast in our commitment to conservation and embrace a  future where biodiversity thrives and ecosystems flourish. 

The Embassy of the Republic of Korea and Nepal Tourism Board jointly organized an event to commemorate the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the Republic of Korea and Nepal on April 28, 2024.

The joint team of Nepal and the Republic of Korea successfully climbed the Jugal Himal in Sindhupalchowk district.

A renowned Korean mountaineer and honorary Nepali citizen Um Hong Gil led the South Korean team and record-setter climber Dawa Yangzum Sherpa led the Nepali team in the expedition from April 5 to April 27, 2024.

The successful expedition of the joint team is a shining example of tourism collaboration between the Republic of Korea and Nepal is .

This historic achievement strengthened our bond of friendship and showcased the beauty of Nepal’s natural landscapes and the spirit of adventure. This journey highlighted the potential for collaboration in the field of tourism to create unforgettable experiences for travelers and promote cross-cultural understanding, reads a statement issued by the Embassy of the Republic of Korea.

Minister Hit Bahadur Tamang attended the Korea- Nepal Friendship Expedition ceremony 2024 in Kathmandu on 28 April 2024.

Minister Tamang exchanged a congratulatory message on the 50th Anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Nepal and Republic of Korea.

He also pointed out that over the past 50 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations, both countries have always respected and trusted each other, setting a good example of friendly coexistence and mutually beneficial cooperation in various fields have yielded fruitful results.

Park Tae-Young, ambassador of the Republic of Korea in Nepal, emphasized the 50-year journey as a tale of shared values and mutual respect, contributing to personal and economic development. “I have shared that the Korean government has designated Nepal as a priority cooperation country for 15 consecutive years in development cooperation focusing on vocational education, health, agriculture and ICT.”

The program was attended by the Minister for Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation, lawmakers, diplomats, high level officials from Ministry of Foreign Affairs, media persons, businessmen from tourism sectors and all expedition team members.

Nepal lost to West Indies 'A' by 10 runs in their second match of the T20 series on Sunday.

Earlier on Saturday, Nepal had defeated West Indies ‘A’ by four wickets in the opening match.

A total of five matches are to be played in the series.

In the second match held at Kirtipur-based Tribhuvan University (TU) Cricket Ground today, Nepal, who were chasing the target of 161 runs, were restricted to 150 at the loss of nine wickets in the allotted 20 0vers.

Nepal's Captain Rohit Kumar Poudel scored unbeaten 71 runs while other batsmen except Gulsan Jha (26) and Lokesh Bam (17) could perform strongly.

In the victory of West Indies 'A', Obed McCoy and Gudakesh Motie took two wickets each while Roston Chase and Oshane Thomas took one wicket each.

Choosing to bat first by winning the toss, the West Indies scored 160 at the loss of seven wickets in 20 overs.  Andre Fletcher was the top scorer with 43 off 36 balls including three sixes while Gudakesh Motie contributed 33 and Roston Chase 23.

Similarly, Kushal Bhurtel and Sagar Dhakal for Nepal took two wickets while Sompal Kami and Dipendra Singh Airee took one wicket each.

The third match in the tournament will take place on Wednesday.

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal has said Nepal is a suitable destination for investment, calling upon the investors from across the globe to seize the opportunity and be benefitted from this.

The Prime Minister said this while inaugurating the Nepal Investment Summit 2024 here today.

On the occasion, the PM asserted that there are immense opportunities for investment in Nepal and it is a potential country for investment from legal, geographical and strategic perspective as well.

Stating that Nepal is fully committed to a liberal economic policy, he reassured that an investment-friendly environment has been created in the country.

The Prime Minister said Nepal is continuously moving ahead towards creating a friendly environment for the investors, industrialists, entrepreneurs and innovators. In this connection, he added, eight various laws related to business and investment have been reformed.

President of the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FNCCI) Chandra Prasad Dhakal has urged investors from around the world to seize the opportunity and invest in Nepal's burgeoning economy.

Addressing the Third Nepal Investment Summit 2024, he emphasized the country's colossal untapped sectors and its potential as an investment destination.

Dhakal highlighted Nepal's strategic location between the economic powerhouses of China and India, underscoring its significance as a gateway to vast markets.

He emphasized the abundant opportunities across various sectors, including tourism, infrastructure, energy, agriculture, technology, and ICT.

The FNCCI President particularly spotlighted the immense potential in renewable energy, citing recent agreements for power trade with India and Bangladesh as indicators of Nepal's capability in hydropower generation and regional trade.

He also underscored the need for modern infrastructure in tourism, agriculture, and technology sectors to harness Nepal's rich cultural heritage, natural beauty, and young, dynamic workforce.

Moreover, Dhakal emphasized the importance of investing in technical education to bridge the gap between demand and supply of skilled human resources, thereby boosting both domestic employment and remittance inflows.

He commended the government's efforts in implementing business-friendly policies and initiatives to facilitate foreign investment, including recent amendments and bilateral investment agreements.

Highlighting FNCCI's role in boosting investor confidence through international business summits in New Delhi, Beijing, and Dubai, Dhakal assured continuous support and commitment from the Nepali private sector for joint ventures in all potential sectors.

He shared his belief in Nepal's emerging growth story and encouraged forging partnerships to chart a path towards sustainable development and prosperity.

India, the world's largest democracy, is busy holding the 18th Lok Sabha elections which will conclude on June 1. The global community is closely watching the outcomes of these elections. With its burgeoning population having surpassed China's, India is on track to claim the mantle of the world's third-largest economy by 2030. As a key player in the Indo-Pacific region and a torchbearer for the Global South, India's policies, both domestic and foreign, resonate far beyond its borders.

The significance of India's elections reverberates throughout the region. While there are widespread projections that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) will win a third consecutive term, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi continuing in office, opposition parties are expected to strengthen their position compared to the 2019 elections.

The election outcomes in India are of particular significance for South Asian nations including Nepal, where India wields deep political, economic and military influence. In 2014, upon assuming power with a resounding victory, Prime Minister Narendra Modi reinvigorated the 'Neighborhood First' policy, although he failed to achieve the expected outcomes. 

To demonstrate the BJP government's priority for neighbors, he invited the heads of state and government from South Asian countries to attend his swearing-in ceremony. When re-elected in 2019, Modi continued the 'Neighborhood First' policy by inviting BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Pectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) member countries to his swearing-in ceremony. If re-elected for a third term, the BJP government is likely to maintain the 'Neighborhood First' policy, although India has been focusing more on regions beyond South Asia in recent years. 

Despite occasional highs and lows, the trajectory of Nepal-India relations points toward a positive outlook, poised to weather the complexities of shared history and future aspirations.

Over the past decade, under Modi's leadership, Nepal-India relations have witnessed many highs and lows. However, the relationship is moving in a positive direction, which should continue even after the elections.

Crucial issues such as the 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty and boundary disputes remain on the diplomatic agenda, albeit the two countries approach them with varying degrees of emphasis. Nevertheless, the two neighbors recognize the imperative of fostering trust and stability to navigate these challenges successfully. A notable shift in India's approach to the internal affairs of its neighbors signals a promising era of cooperation built on mutual respect and understanding.

The BJP government has changed its approach on how to view the internal political affairs of South Asian countries which has helped to build an environment trust.

One encouraging signal is that economic collaboration has emerged as a cornerstone of bilateral relations, with a growing focus on development partnerships and infrastructure projects. Despite changes in political leadership, the momentum in bilateral engagements remains steady, underpinning a commitment to sustained progress and prosperity.

Over the past three decades, India has faced charges of not completing development projects for extended periods. However, several bilateral projects are now making progress, ultimately helping to build an environment of trust. Recent visits by Nepali leaders to New Delhi and Indian leaders to Kathmandu have focused on enhancing economic and development partnerships. The energy cooperation agreement between Nepal and India has paved the way for regional energy cooperation, with Nepal positioned as a clean energy provider to the region. 

As India's economy continues to rise and rise, and major multinational companies shift their industries to India, Nepal, which shares an open border, should get the opportunities. India could become a destination not only for unskilled Nepali workforce but also for highly skilled professionals in sectors such as education, health, IT, banking, and others, which have not received much discussion. Both Nepal and India should seriously consider these issues and clearly outline their plans to derive economic benefits from India's rising economy. These matters should be taken seriously regardless of which party comes to power.

Amid robust economic collaboration between two countries, over the past few years, Nepal is witnessing a debate about the growing ideological influence of BJP in Nepal. In recent years, there has been a perception among Nepali leaders and the public that the BJP and its affiliates are pushing for a Hindu agenda in Nepal. It is often said that they are suggesting (sometimes pressuring) Nepali leaders to scrap secularism and go for the Hindu state. There are also reports that various organizations linked with the BJP are active in Nepal with their Hindu agenda. 

While Nepal's top leaders are aware of those issues, they have not spoken publicly. However, they want to discuss those issues with Indian leaders. BJP leaders should be mindful that such efforts could again strain the bilateral relationship, which has reached a new level after sustained efforts from both sides. It would be worthwhile to recall India's approach to the demands of Madhes-based parties, mainly after 2017, which helped enhance the bilateral relations.

Many Nepali politicians and analysts view the growing activities of Hindu organizations as an attempt to overturn the 2015 constitution. This suspicion among Nepali politicians obviously does not help enhance the bilateral relationship. There should be frank and open discussions between the two sides, not only on these issues but also on other issues of mutual concern. 

India's relationship with global powers also affects its South Asia policy. The India-US strategic partnership is likely to be enhanced, but there are divergent views on several bilateral and global issues, including the Russia-Ukraine war. The India-China relationship is unlikely to improve for at least the next few years. As I have highlighted in my previous columns, Nepal's approach should be not to engage in the big-power rivalry but to focus on economic development.

The future of Nepal-India relations hinges not on fleeting political interests but on a shared commitment to long-term prosperity and mutual respect. By prioritizing economic and developmental collaboration, both nations can chart a course toward a brighter, more interconnected future.