Nepal’s Supreme Court has summoned the President Chure Terai Madhesh Conservation Development Board and the National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC) in a public interest litigation case against the amendment of the <a href="https://www.forestaction.org/app/webroot/js/tinymce/editor/plugins/filemanager/files/National_Park_Act_1973_Nepal%20(1).pdf">1973 National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act</a>.
The Constitutional Bench comprising Chief Justice Bishowambhar Prasad Shrestha, as Justices Prakash Man Singh Raut, <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/latest/the-goal-is-empowerment-and-independence-of-women">Sapana Pradhan Malla</a>, Prakash Kumar Dhungana and Kumar Regmi ordered representatives of the two institutions to appear in court for a hearing on the writ petition.
In July, President Ramchandra Paudel authenticated a Bill passed hurriedly and secretively by the new NC-UML coalition in both Houses to amend provisions in the 1973 Act to allow investment in infrastructure and projects inside protected areas.
Read more: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/protecting-protected-areas-from-infrastructure">Protecting protected areas from infrastructure</a>, Sonia Awale
Senior advocates Prakash Mani Sharma, Dilraj Khanal and Padam Bahadur Shrestha filed a writ in the Supreme Court demanding that the amendments be declared null and void because the amendments added in Section 5A of the Act were against Nepal’s own conservation commitments, and obligations under international biodiversity pacts of which Nepal is a signatory.
The petitioners argue that the amendments were introduced through an investment bill by the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies instead of the Ministry of Forests and Environment, and would throw off the careful balance between environmental protection and development in Nepal.
There is a danger Nepal’s internationally-recognised successes in doubling forest cover in 25 years to 46% of area mainly because of community forestry,<a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/people-tigers-trees-and-rivers"> tripling the tiger population</a>, and biodiversity protection will be rolled back, they say. The amendment is reportedly being pushed by politicians and their powerful business cronies with support from some international consultants.
Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/comment/protecting-nepal-s-parks-by-saving-buffer-zones">Protecting Nepal’s parks by saving buffer zones</a>, Teri D Allendorf
The writ petition also argues that the fragmentation of the authority and integrity of protected areas will directly contribute to irreversible ecological damage, harming local livelihoods and heighten inequity.&nbsp;
The petitioners claim that the amendment poses not only an unfair restriction on the right of Nepali citizens to live in a clean and healthy environment, but directly interferes with human-nature coexistence.
As it is, forest protection is the only climate target pledged by Nepal’s leaders at international conferences that the country has actually met. Another investigation shows that illegal logging and timber smuggling is rampant mainly in three Tarai districts bordering India where forest cover is said to have declined by half in past decades.&nbsp;
In particular, section 5A of the Act, which has provisions related to prohibited activities within national parks and reserves, now includes an added clause which will essentially allow the government to designate 'non-sensitive' areas within these protected zones, enabling private sector investment in resorts, cable cars, railways and other infrastructure.&nbsp;
Some international credit agencies and investors argue that Nepal’s economy and local communities must benefit from the country’s conservation successes, and the best way is to allow carefully calibrated investment in national parks, conservation areas, and community forests.
Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/conservation-vs-conservatives">Conservation vs Conservatives</a>, Maheshwor Acharya
That may work in countries where politicians are accountable and the rule of law prevails, but with Nepal’s current level of corruption and governance failure, handing over nature to big business is a recipe for disaster.
Examples abound of recent cut-and-paste environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports presented by the government for the proposed <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/15-points-for-and-against-nijgad-airport">international airport in Nijgad </a>and hydropower projects in ecologically and culturally fragile Himalayan valleys.&nbsp;
Nepal was relatively successful in addressing the humans vs nature challenge by balancing the needs of local people with national parks.&nbsp;
Now we have entered a new era of state vs nature. &nbsp;&nbsp;

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

thumbnail

viewImage

State vs Nature

The LGBTQ+ community hailed a historical breakthrough in their rights on 28 June as Justice Til Prasad Shrestha of Nepal’s Supreme Court issued a temporary order to register same-sex marriages. Ten days later as parties applied to the District Court to register their marriage judge Madhav Prasad Mainali of the Kathmandu District Court rejected the application for marriage registration. A sub ordinate court appeared to be defying a Supreme Court ruling. The applicant Maya Gurung (legally named Ram Bahadur Gurung in court documents) filed a petition at the High Court Patan asking it to quash the District Court’s illegal order that stopped the registration of their marriage. Last week the High Court upheld the District Court’s ruling calling the refusal to register same-sex marriage legal. The High Court has predicated its decisions on legal procedure as opposed to substantive rights. There are also lawyers on both sides who believe in the human rights and equality of LGBTQ+ community but battle lines have been drawn on legal technicalities. Supreme Court Justice Til Prasad Shrestha in an ex parte hearing ordered the Government of Nepal to make temporary provisions to register no-heterosexual marriages. ‘This came out of an ex parte hearing!’ several friends who are lawyers (and vocal proponents of LGBTQ+ rights) exclaimed, ‘It might be judicial over-reach’ one observed. Their comments are based on legal principles. Ex parte hearings are hearings in which only one party to a case presents arguments and evidence to a judge. The other party is absent. An interim order through an ex parte hearing is sought when the matter at hand is urgent and there is no time to invite both parties to a case to hear the arguments and reach a decision. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/one-step-forward-two-steps-back-on-same-sex-marriage">One step forward two steps back on same-sex marriage</a> To take a hypothetical example, a person’s house is about to be knocked down by a commercial builder. The person may seek to challenge the decision to knock down her house. However, it takes time till the builder is served notice of the lawsuit and invited to court to make their counter arguments. In this instance an emergency interim order may be sought to ‘not knock down the house’ until the case is finally decided. The question is, does the registration of non-heterosexual marriage qualify as an issue of urgency that merited an interim order issued by an ex parte hearing? Marriage registration, unlike other civil matters, invites a complex web of legal repercussions. It affects laws on divorce, domestic violence, polygamy, adoption, child adoption, custody, property inheritance and property division amongst spouses. Barring domestic violence Nepali laws in all these matters only envision a spousal relationship between a heterosexual man and woman. Justice Til Prasad Shrestha is not one to shy away from activism from the bench and issue bold orders. However, his order does not appear to have contemplated any of subsequent effects of marriage on issues of children, property or divorce. His order simply directs the registration of non-heterosexual marriages until subsequent laws are amended to accommodate rights of the LGBTQ+ community. Thus his ex parte order on an issue with expansive legal scope can resonate with perceptions that it is judicial over reach. The Supreme Court order is also issued for the Government of Nepal to make provisions to register same-sex marriages. It is not explicitly issued to the District Courts that are charged with the authority to register all marriages in Nepal. It is a legal technicality but one that is important as it does not compel any courts in Nepal to follow the order. It is a pronouncement for the executive government not the judiciary was one of the arguments presented by a government attorney who defended the Kathmandu District Court’s decision at the High Court. This argument was upheld in the High Court’s ruling. If the Executive government is implementing a legal order that has wide scale impact on a large number of people such as same-sex marriage, it is a legal requirement that notice of this is published in the Raj Patra, the government’s official noticeboard. It was argued that this Raj Patra notice might have been a more compelling order for the District Court to register the marriage. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/a-mother-celebrates-pride">A mother celebrates Pride</a>, Durga Rana Magar  <figure><img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2023101713104_23511b683ea63cf5c3bc0d59a4c3b7ac1a0702eb308a4b3cb492b9a06e313dfd.jpg" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="2023101713104_23511b683ea63cf5c3bc0d59a4c3b7ac1a0702eb308a4b3cb492b9a06e313dfd" data-rendition-name="original" width="1778" height="1000" loading="lazy" alt="same sex marriage"></figure>  The government attorney argued that to issue a Raj Patra notice, the Government of Nepal needs time to make requisite amendments to a host of laws pertaining to family matters in tandem with registering non heterosexual marriage. He sounded alarms of proceeding without requisite preparation by putting questions before High Court judges such as: What happens if there is polygamy in this newly registered marriage? Will we charge anybody or will we ignore it as the law in its current status criminalises polygamy by men only? How will we proceed with divorce and inheritance as men and women are treated differently by Nepali laws? Whilst there is allure of a technical argument that asks for reasonable preparation time for the Government of Nepal, it is worth remembering that the government has had 16 years to do this work. The landmark decision in the case of Sunil Babu Panta not just decriminalised same-sex marriage but also ordered the Government of Nepal to make arrangements, including enacting new laws or amending existing laws, to ensure that people of different gender identities and sexual orientations could enjoy their rights without discrimination. The High Court order states that if the government of Nepal makes required provisions same-sex marriages can be registered accordingly. An interim order is not a final decision. The case still needs to be heard in full by the Supreme Court with lawyers from the applicant’s side and the Government’s side making arguments for and against registering same-sex marriage. The constitution is unequivocal in its provision of rights to equality and special protection for gender and sexual minorities. This provides grounds to pre-empt that the court will likely uphold the constitution in the final decision though there is always a chance of surprise. However, in law the devil lies in the details. It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court manoeuvres orders towards an obstinate government and legislature to implement any judgment it issues. Within the court’s rank is Justice Hari Phuyal who was litigating on behalf of Sunil Babu Panta in 2007. There is no shortage of subject matter expertise in the ranks of judges now. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/eleganza-extravaganza">Eleganza Extravaganza</a>, Sahina Shrestha Any rights given to the LGBTQ+ community meets with resistance and controversy. The Supreme Court must ensure that if it confers any rights to this community it safeguards it against procedural and technical legal challenges. Currently the LGBTQ+ community and the country waits in suspense as this petition awaits hearing at the Supreme Court. The uncertainty of when they will get their day in court is unfair to a large population. The Supreme Court has decided cases swiftly in the past like the case of MP Rabi Lamichhane. There is no reason why it cannot do the same for this case by issuing a date for the hearing with orders that there can be no adjournment. This move would lend clarity to the status or rights of LGBTQ+ communities instead of holding them hostage to procedural arguments and delays. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-is-ahead-of-many-countries-in-lgbtqi-rights">"Nepal is ahead of many countries in LGBTQI+ rights"</a> Aastha Dahal is a Kathmandu-based lawyer with a PhD in criminology from the University of Cambridge.

Right to marry in Nepal

Background&nbsp;
July 2022: Both Houses of Parliament passed an amendment to Nepal’s Citizenship Act 2006. Called the Nepal Citizenship (First Amendment) Bill, it was sent to former Nepal President Bidya Devi Bhandari for formal ratification. 
 
August 2022: Bhandari sent the bill back to the Sher Bahadur Deuba-led Lower House with 15 ‘concerns and suggestions’ for review. 
 
September 2022: The bill was once more passed by both Houses of Parliament without any changes, but <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/news/president-s-precedent">Sital Niwas allowed its 20 September ratification deadline to lapse</a>. Since the ceremonial head of state did not authenticate the bill, it was rendered null and void. Many saw this deadlock as a result of the power struggle between the opposition UML, which had appointed Bhandari president, and the NC-UML coalition. 
 
September 2022: Parliament was dissolved after completing its five-year term. 
 
March 2023: President Bhandari herself completed her tenure and was succeeded by Ram Chandra Poudel. 
 
31 May 2023: President Poudel authenticated the Citizenship Amendment Bill rejected by his predecessor, following a recommendation by the Council of Ministers.
Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepals-unequal-citizenship-law">Nepal's unequal Citizenship Law</a>, Ajay Pradhan
What is in it?
The amendment clears the way for children of parents who got citizenship by birth to become citizens by descent and paves the way for hundreds of thousands of Nepalis, especially in the Tarai, to finally become Nepali citizens. The bill also allows Non-Resident Nepalis (NRNs), except for those residing within South Asia, to acquire dual citizenship but without the right to vote.&nbsp;
Activists have long said the bill’s restrictions on citizenship for children born to single mothers as well as the process of obtaining naturalised citizenship were discriminatory towards women.
The bill allows foreign women married to Nepali men to immediately obtain naturalised citizenship provided the women renounce the citizenship of their country of origin. But there is no similar provision for foreign men married to Nepali women to get Nepali citizenship.&nbsp;
Meanwhile, children born to Nepali mothers born in and residing in Nepal whose fathers are not identified are eligible for Nepali citizenship by descent. However, the woman must make a self-declaration that the father cannot be identified and she can be imprisoned if the claim turns out to be false.
A Nepali man does not have to mention any details of the mother of their child to get citizenship. A child born to a Nepali man married to a foreign woman can obtain citizenship by descent, but a child born to a Nepali mother and a foreign father will only be eligible for naturalised citizenship provided the state deems it okay.&nbsp;
Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/are-women-not-nepali-enough">Are women not Nepali enough?</a>, Sahina Shrestha
What now?&nbsp;
President Ram Chandra Poudel’s authentication of the Citizenship Amendment Bill on 31 May on the eve of Prime Minister Dahal’s official visit to India drew both outrage and appreciation from across the political spectrum and civil society.
While NRNs as well as hundreds of thousands of people mostly in the Tarai deprived of citizenship welcomed the move, some constitutional and political experts were critical of the process by which the president ratified the bill.&nbsp;
“In a parliamentary system, neither the President nor the government has the right or the authority to validate a dormant bill, one passed by an already lapsed House,” said constitutional expert Bipin Adhikari. “The ball was not in President Poudel’s court.”
Usha Malla Pathak, former Vice President of the Nepal Bar Association, agreed: “The move by the President to authenticate the bill, which was not passed by a new Parliament, is unconstitutional so there is no point debating its merits.”
While some parties are entirely against the bill, others seem to agree with some parts of it while disagreeing with others-- especially provision allowing foreign women married to Nepali men to obtain naturalised citizenship without any waiting period.
Read also:<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/patriarchy-in-an-oligarchy"> Patriarchy in an oligarchy</a>
Nationalist groups have said the bill would open the floodgates for Indians to marry Nepalis and settle down in the Tarai. Critics wondered if there was a connection to the timing of the ratification just before Prime Minister Dahal’s official visit to India.
Members of Dahal’s coalition, including the NC’s GaganThapa have publicly criticised the bill. Rabi Lamichhane’s RSP has called the bill anti-national.&nbsp;
On Sunday, the Supreme Court acting on a writ petition issued an interim order against the implementation of the amendment bill. Many without citizenship who had reached government offices across the country to get their certificates were once again turned back.&nbsp;
In Parliament on Monday, Prime Minister Dahal deferred decision on the bill to the apex court, whereas the opposition UML leader K P Oli called for a new bill to be tabled in the House for discussion.
The Supreme Court Bar Association on Tuesday put out a statement calling the authentication of the bill unconstitutional.
‘It is the opinion of the Bar Association that the honourable president has approved the Citizenship Bill against Nepal’s parliamentary system, the Constitution, and the principle of the separation of powers,’ wrote Bar Secretary Shyam Kumar Khatri.
Read also: <a href="https://archive.nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=18401#.YuNBD-xByrc">Stateless in their motherland</a>, Kunda Dixit
<h2>Once a Nepali, always Nepali</h2>
Much of the to-and-fro about the Citizenship Amendment Bill which has been blocked by the Supreme Court after ratification by President, has centred on the fact that the president should not have approved a bill that was passed by a lapsed parliament.&nbsp;
However, many Nepalis are not worried about due process not being followed, but on the contents of the bill: specifically the provision allowing foreign women married to Nepali men to immediately obtain naturalised citizenship. The <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/news/indian-nepalis-alarmed-by-citizenship-amendment-bill">rhetoric</a> surrounding this debate has been hyper-nationalist, anti-Indian, and anti-Madhes.&nbsp;
The opposition UML has been using similar nationalist and populist talking points to criticise the bill, and the RSP, the new party of young professionals which exited the governing coalition joined the fray, calling it “anti-national”.
One notable aspect of the bill that has been overshadowed is the provision for Non-Resident Nepalis (NRNs) to finally obtain dual citizenship. NRNs will however not be allowed to vote, run for public office or hold civil service jobs, and dual citizenship applies only to overseas Nepalis and not those in South Asia.
NRNs seeking dual citizenship need to present proof that their parent or grandparent is a Nepali citizen. They must present proof of having renounced Nepali citizenship, and must have foreign citizenship.
Those who have not renounced their Nepali citizenship previously cannot use the same identification and must present their old citizenship before they obtain a new Nepali citizenship.&nbsp;
Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/nepals-suffragette-moment/" target="_blank">Nepal's suffragette moment</a>, Om Astha Rai
NRNs can open bank accounts in Nepal, own and operate businesses and conduct trade, buy land and property, inherit assets, make investments.
The Non-Resident Nepalese Association (NRNA) promptly welcomed the bill’s authentication, saying in a statement:&nbsp;
‘The bill addresses the long-standing demand for Non-Resident Nepali Citizenship from millions of non-resident Nepalis scattered around the world since 2003. We are confident that this step by the Honourable President will soon give meaning to the NRNA mantra of Once a Nepali, always a Nepali.’
It added that this connects Nepali people worldwide to their homeland and utilise their knowledge, skills, and capital to benefit Nepal.
<div class="embed-block"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I’m so pleased to hear that Nepal’s Government have just passed a new Citizenship Bill – this is great news - why? For a number of reasons but one is that now Non-Resident Nepalis (NRNs) – including Gurkhas - can have dual citizenship. Currently around 2.17 million Nepalis live… <a href="https://t.co/HIXLJUKzgf">pic.twitter.com/HIXLJUKzgf</a>&mdash; Nirmal Purja MBE (@nimsdai) <a href="https://twitter.com/nimsdai/status/1664185815419977733?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
Although some overseas Nepalis that Nepali Times spoke to said they had no knowledge about the bill, others were overjoyed that they could now invest in Nepal and contribute to the home economy.&nbsp;
Former British Army commando and mountaineer Nimsdai Purja was among those who took to social media to express his appreciation.
‘Granting NRN this new legal citizenship…will allow NRNs to practice full economic, social and cultural rights. I believe it is a step in the right direction towards a more positive and prosperous future for the country,’ wrote Purja. ‘This makes tourism and investment easier … means that the wealth is distributed from central areas like Kathmandu to less wealthy communities in mountain areas.’&nbsp;

Shristi Karki

Nepal’s Citizenship Amendment Bill explained

<img width="1394" height="958" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111413114/63722ebe9c7e80680e0c24dcjpeg.jpg" alt=""/>Three days after the Supreme Court released the full text of its verdict ordering the government to halt all plans to build a new <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/building-nijgad-come-what-may/">international airport at Nijgad Forest</a>, Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba flew down to the site in an Army helicopter. His Communist coalition partners Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Madhav Kumar Nepal went along for the ride.In defiance of the Supreme Court, Deuba vowed to challenge the ruling. Sitting in a semicircle of sofas with other Cabinet ministers, he declared: “The government is committed to completing the construction of both the Nijgad airport and the Kathmandu-Tarai Expressway linking it to the capital.”Deuba interpreted the 3-2 ruling by the justices to mean that the high court had not actually rejected building the airport, just to ensure adherence to environmental safeguards. Why such a show of force and thumbing of noses on the part of the executive against the judiciary? Tagging along with Deuba on the Nijgad flyby were the entire cabinet and coalition partners. Not only is the unity of the coalition hanging by a thread as individual members weigh their chances in November's federal and provincial elections, but member parties are also <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/deubas-mixed-report-card/">rife with internal tension.</a>The <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/aborted-landing-in-nijgad/">real estate mafia</a> with close ties to the leadership of all political parties has reportedly invested heavily in land surrounding the proposed $3.6 billion airport. <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/aborted-landing-in-nijgad/">Contractors will also benefit</a> from political patronage and are rubbing their palms at <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/15-points-for-and-against-nijgad-airport/">felling an entire forest</a> of hardwood timber.But the more immediate reason for government partners and the entire cabinet to airlift itself to Nijgad on Saturday was <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/planting-seeds-of-democracy/">to show that the coalition is strong </a>and united. <img width="1738" height="832" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111413114/63722ec29c7e80680e0c24ddjpeg.jpg" alt="">The trip also came the day after the dissident Nepali Congress leader Shekhar Koirala accused Deuba of no longer being the president of his own party, but president of the coalition. Koirala’s faction includes deputy president Dhanaraj Gurung and general secretary Gagan Thapa, and threatened to launch a “constructive opposition” against its own party leadership. It also accused Deuba of tolerating lack of transparency in the Finance Ministry, and of his inability to take action to protect the economy from further shock.Bagmati Province Chief Minister Rajendra Pandey was also in the group. Nijgad falls within Madhes Province, and its Chief Minister Lal Babu Raut also wants the airport project to go ahead to spur economic growth.Rajendra Pandey’s inclusion in the trip taken win added significance because he has refused to step down as chief minister of Bagmati Province as agreed earlier with the coalition partners. In fact, Nepali Congress leaders in Hetauda had started a signature campaign against Pandey and a decision was to be taken at a parliamentary party meeting of the Unified Socialists on Saturday itself.The other reason for the trip was for Deuba to send an indirect message of defiance to the Supreme Court that it had no business interfering with decisions of the government.  It was a signal that the executive does not feel compelled to follow word for word any decision of the judiciary. <img width="1500" height="1000" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111413114/63722ec59c7e80680e0c24dejpeg.jpg" alt="">In fact, the Supreme Court’s decision has taken the proposal to build an international report in Nijgad to its pre-1995 date. From now on, we should no longer refer to Nijgad as <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/does-nepal-need-a-4th-international-airport/">a proposed international airport</a>, but as the last remaining native tropical forest in the eastern Tarai that it is. The Court's final text says: ‘We do not see any logical argument to prove that there is no other alternative to building an airport at Nijgad.’An exhaustive and lengthy sentence in the verdict goes on to state: ‘In addition to the economic and technical feasibility of the airport, there needs to be an objective, neutral and competent assessment by economists, social scientists, administration experts, of the impact on the environment, forest ecosystem, wildlife of the region, and an investigation into alternative sites where actual and realistic ways to minimise the environment impact are examined so that a legally acceptable environmental risk assessment report can be made that takes into account expert advice, to conclude what capacity airport should be built, where, and in what area, and the court orders that these factors are then taken into account to decide on the location of an airport that has the smallest ecological footprint.’Translated, these 119 pages of legalese means that the Supreme Court has decided that destroying the Nijgad Forest to build an airport <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zurich-airport-international-opts-out-of-nepal-project/">is not worth the damage</a>. The issue now is: will the government dare to go against this verdict?Read more: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/nijgads-green-runway/">Nijgad’s green runway</a>, Kashish Das Shrestha

Flight of fancy

<img width="1279" height="774" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111016118/636d141b9c7e80680e0a995fjpeg.jpg" alt=""/>Till he was recalled last month by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, Nilambar Acharya was Nepal’s ambassador to India since 2019. Acharya had previously served as Law Minister, as well as the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee. He spoke to Santa Gaha Magar about Indo-Nepal relations, and the country’s domestic politics:Nepali Times: As someone who was posted to New Delhi during a <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/untangling-the-kalapani-knot/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">rocky period in bilateral relations</a>  please give some insight into the current state of India-Nepal ties.Nilamber Acharya: The relationship between Nepal and India is vast and nuanced. There are problems as well as positives, and they cannot be understood if we look at them in a one-dimensional framework. We need to be careful that the problems do not overshadow the positive aspects of our relationship. The Indian people have a lot of goodwill towards Nepalis.Like any other relationship, our bilateral ties need to evolve in the context of the times. And that has been the biggest challenge. Both governments and their political leadership need to be especially mindful of this fact.What could be the reasons why India has not formally received the report prepared by the bilateral Eminent Persons' Group (EPG) on Nepal-India relations?I am not sure why India has been reluctant to receive the EPG report. The document, which is integral to strengthening the foundations of our bilateral relationship, was finalised in consensus with four members from both countries. If India delays acknowledging and receiving the report any longer, it will be that much more difficult to move forward to review our diplomatic relations.Could it be that Nepal has not taken a more active initiative to implement the report?We have consistently engaged with our Indian counterparts to follow up on the EPG. There was not a single meeting during my term as ambassador when this report wasn’t discussed.In fact, then-Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj at one stage before the 2019 Indian elections had assured us that India would receive the report. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said the same thing during the inauguration of the Nepal-India Petroleum Pipeline. Ultimately, it did not work out.After that, was there not enough pressure from Nepal, or did the Indians change their mind? Initially, both sides had agreed to submit the report first to the Prime Minister of India, then to the Prime Minister of Nepal, following which it would be made public via a press conference. However, there has been a roadblock from the Indian side. As I said, Nepal has repeatedly reminded and urged our counterparts to move forward with the report, but to no avail. Once the report is received, it would then be up to both the governments to decide whether to implement the its provisions and to what extent. One thing is for sure. Our bilateral relationships cannot move forward on the basis of the 1950 treaty.Could <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/india-china-and-nepals-political-crisis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">India’s perceptions on Nepal vis-à-vis China</a> be one of the reasons?Our relations with India and China are mutually exclusive to one another. Establishing diplomatic ties with another country does not mean that our relations with India have weakened. Diplomatic relations with countries have different contexts, and must therefore be understood separately. Diplomatic ties with one nation do not and should not have a negative effect on relations with another.Let us turn to Nepal. As a former law minister, what are your views on the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepals-lawyers-on-warpath-against-chief-justice/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Supreme Court row</a>?The current controversy surrounding the Supreme Court is not limited to whether the Chief Justice should resign or not. This issue is emblematic of a widespread disease that has for long plagued the very foundation of Nepal’s judiciary, which needs to be addressed properly. It is the responsibility of the Chief Justice, the judges of the court, and the government to address and solve those problems immediately.However, instances of judges boycotting the court and refusing to hear and try cases are not representative of the principles of the judiciary. The <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/the-real-story-in-nepals-supreme-court-debacle/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">problems within the court</a> must under no circumstances impact the judicial process or hinder Nepalis’ right to justice.Who is responsible?The government, political leadership, and experts in the field must come together to identify the problem through research and investigation. <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/what-is-happening-to-nepals-supreme-court/">What is happening to Nepal’s Supreme Court?</a>, Santa Gaha MagarMany have linked the Constitutional Council, the Judicial Council, and even the Constitution of Nepal to the problems surrounding the Supreme Court. Do you see any flaws in the constitution?Seeing as the Constitution maintains objectivity over all things, debates about flaws in the Constitution do not come into play in this matter. What needs to be thoroughly examined is whether there are irregularities in institutional appointments and if the concerned authorities have been doing the work that they were assigned to do. Corruption must be investigated and the corrupt punished, but baseless public indictment must not be entertained. That is how this disease can be treated.Is our constitutional structure equipped to establish bodies to address our current problems?
The government should not remain silent in this matter by leaving it up to the judiciary. Rather, should find a solution to this problem through political means, by hearing the grievances of all disputing groups.
Moreover, it is natural to protest and make your voices heard, but the movements concerning this issue must not be drawn out to the degree that it affects the people's right to justice. That is not correct.
If the government gets involved, doesn’t it mean that the executive and the legislature are interfering in matters of the judiciary?
It is not to say that the government should direct the judiciary on what to do and what not to do, and should not be taken to mean as a call against the<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/supreme-court-puts-nepal-politics-back-on-track/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> separation of powers</a>. Rather, the government must facilitate the judiciary in the administration of justice. This is similar to how the executive assigns the budget to the court, and how laws implemented by the judiciary are passed by the parliament.
As it is, this became a matter of political concern as soon as the problem could not be contained within the judiciary, and the fights and disagreements spilled out into the streets.
Many have compared the current state of Nepal’s judiciary to that of post-panchayat Nepal in 1990. Was the judiciary in a better position then than it is now?
The circumstances surrounding Nepal’s courts then and now are incomparable. Nepal’s judiciary only became independent after 1990, following which judges were appointed through a democratic system. Before that, judges used to be assigned for having joined a political party, or simply for holding and voicing opinions about the need for democracy. 
Was that a good arrangement? Certainly not. Barring some decisions in the favour of the people and the media, court decisions largely discriminated against the citizens and deprived them of their rights.
Other aspects of Nepali society have been cited as being better before than it is now.
As I said, comparisons do not help. Nepal in the past did not have inclusion, in the human, political, and civil rights and liberties spheres. And while this is not to say that the past was without any progress, it is inaccurate to say that Nepal was more just or democratic in the past. 
The people could neither form governments nor change them if they were dissatisfied. In fact, they were not people at all, but subjects. As far as the courts were concerned, judicial decisions were heavily influenced by forces outside the judiciary. As it was, people were able to demand to be heard and were ultimately successful in establishing democracy in 1990. Following the king’s refusal to be a subordinate to his people, Nepal became a republic.
What is your response to those who ascribe the current problems within Nepal to republicanism, secularism and federalism?
The reasons for problems in Nepal at present are not due to the Constitution--although the Constitution should be amended in time--but due to a failure to implement its provisions. Societal instability is not due to republicanism or inclusion, but due to the inability to bring those concepts into practice. The flaw lies not in democracy, but in the fact that we do not have a functioning democratic process. The multi-party system is not responsible, but <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/they-fail-we-fall/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">factions operating within individual political parties</a> are.
The problem is not the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. The problem is that we have not yet been able to bring into practice what the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal symbolises.
So republicanism or secularism are not directly threatened?
Everyone has the freedom to voice different views in a democratic society, and we have come a long way to achieve this. When people are dissatisfied with the democratic process, they can express that through the polls. What is in the past will remain there, be it the Rana regime, the Panchayat, or the monarchy. The only way to move is forward.
Does it seem like Nepal’s major political parties have been stingy in taking ownership of the federal democratic republic?
Nepal’s history from a monarchy to a federal democratic republic is the result of significant transitions. We have been headed in a positive direction, and things are not worse than they were before. For instance, it is not to say that corruption has increased, rather the awareness of corruption and the need to hold those corrupt to account has increased. Similarly, we are at a point where we can openly speak out against discrimination and mistreatment of communities. 
There is no need to be discouraged by the momentum of Nepal’s socio-political progress. However, even though Nepal is a multi-party democracy, the responsibility of preserving the democratic process and strengthening the republic lies primarily with the Nepali Congress and the UML. Nepalis are soon going to make their voices heard through the polls, and how they fare in the upcoming elections will determine the future of the country.

“India-Nepal ties must move beyond 1950 treaty”

<img width="800" height="506" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110161132/636d1a0e9c7e80680e0ac851jpeg.jpg" alt=""/>Even though Nepal’s political parties do not seem very keen for the moment to impeach controversial Chief Justice Cholendra SJB Rana, the mutiny against him is spreading among justices and lawyers.Chief Justice Rana’s alleged pressure on Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba to make his brother-in-law a minister earlier this month and other purported misdemeanours have halted proceedings in the Supreme Court as judges and lawyers go on the warpath.Things have got so volatile that on Friday lawyers for and against Rana had a fistfight outside the Nepal Bar Association as it was announcing an intensified agitation against the chief justice. A video clip of the scuffle went viral on Nepal’s social media.<blockquote>नेपाल बार अगाडि वकिलबीच कुटाकुट प्रधानन्यायाधीश चोलेन्द्र शमशेर जबराका समर्थक र विरोधी वकिलबीच शुक्रबार नेपाल बारभित्रै कुटाकुट भएको हो। <a href="https://t.co/lCX8qdJBNJ">pic.twitter.com/lCX8qdJBNJ</a>— Setopati (@setopati) <a href="https://twitter.com/setopati/status/1453995371030454272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2021</a></blockquote> Video: SETOPATI/TWITTER<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/what-is-happening-to-nepals-supreme-court/">What is happening to Nepal's Supreme Court?</a>, Santa Gaha MagarThe row over the chief justice has cast a spotlight on the transactional relationship between Nepal’s executive and judicial branches, and deliberate and blatant attempts by the political leadership and the chief justice to violate the principle of<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/supreme-court-puts-nepal-politics-back-on-track/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> separation of powers</a>.Public and judicial outcry ensued after news emerged that the Chief Justice had <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/what-is-delaying-nepal-cabinet-expansion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">demanded ministerial appointments</a> for two of his people as the coalition government was deliberating a much-delayed Cabinet expansion earlier this month.Deuba agreed to one cabinet position, appointing Rana’s brother-in-law Gajendra Hamal as the Industry, Commerce and Supplies Minister. Deuba and Rana both refuted allegations of bargaining, but not very convincingly. Even Deuba’s own party members said appointing Hamal was wrong.As the outrage spread, Hamal resigned less than 48 hours into his ministership, but this only added fuel to the fire as many saw it as an admission of the chief justice and the prime minister <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/quid-pro-quo/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">scratching each others’ backs</a>.To be sure, other members of the ruling five-party coalition have not shown much interest in registering an impeachment motion in Parliament against Rana. In fact, Parliament was conveniently prorogued on Friday, citing the opposition UML’s disruptions of proceedings. The UML’s K P Oli, who had to step down as prime minister after the Supreme Court ruled in July that his <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-supreme-court-restores-house/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dissolution of the House</a> was unconstitutional, is also opposed to impeachment — saying that five other judges who passed that verdict should also resign.<a style="font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/old-wine-in-old-bottle-in-nepal-politics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Old wine in old bottle in Nepal's politics</a>, Shristi KarkiFor the past week, justices and lawyers have been boycotting full court meetings called by Rana, as well as cases in the Supreme Court and other courts across Nepal, bringing the judicial process to a standstill. As it is, only the Chief Justice-led single bench has been conducting hearings at Nepal’s top court.On Friday, the Nepal Bar Association issued an ultimatum to Chief Justice Rana to resign by 3 November, otherwise, it would undertake escalating protests including further boycotts of hearings, preventing Rana from entering the Supreme Court premises and even street rallies.On Thursday, Rana repeated in an interview with BBC Nepali that he would not step down just because some justices were calling for it. “I was appointed through a constitutional process, and I can only be removed through a constitutional process,” said Rana, possible convinced that the political parties would not move to impeach him.However, second-tier leaders of the Nepali Congress on Friday issued a statement calling on their party to protect judicial independence, the rule of law and separation of powers. ‘The Nepali Congress cannot remain silent in the controversy involving the chief justice when there is so much opposition to him from within the Supreme Court and the legal system,’ the statement by 12 NC members including Gagan Thapa, Sarita Prasai, and Dhanaraj Gurung said.And as Chief Justices, current justices on the court, as well as the Nepal Bar Association and the Supreme Court Bar Association called on the Chief Justice to step down, <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-govt-fills-cabinet-after-3-months/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Deuba and his coalition partners</a> have stayed silent on the matter, privately hoping that Rana will resign and take the decision out of their hands.Rana, who was appointed Nepal’s top judge by the KP Oli government in 2019, has remained steadfast in his refusal to resign unless the four other justices of the five-member bench that reinstated the parliament dissolved by Oli and appointed Deuba Prime Minister resigned along with him. The four other justices are Deepak Karki, Mira Khadka, Ishwor Khatiwada, and Ananda Mohan Bhattarai.Instead, Rana has said that he is ready to face the constitutional process, daring the coalition to file an impeachment motion.Every politician and party has a reason not to anger Chief Justice Rana at present. A hearing against Madhav Kumar Nepal and Baburam Bhattarai for their alleged involvement in the Lalita Niwas land ownership case is due on 1 November.Similarly, K P Oli has also filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court against Speaker Agni Sapkota over his refusal to expel then-UML lawmakers as well as against the Election Commission over Madhav Kumar Nepal’s registration of his new party. Sapkota, who is a Maoist, himself also has a war crime case against him pending in court.<a style="font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepals-post-breakup-politics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Nepal's post-breakup politics</a>, Santa Gaha MagarMany see Nepal’s recent political and judicial developments as the beginning of the end of the separation of powers within Nepal’s branches of government.In March 2013, following its failure to draft the Constitution after two-term extensions, Nepal’s Constitutional Assembly was dissolved. Subsequently, Nepal’s political parties, seeking a ‘neutral party’ to oversee the next CA elections, <a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/blogs/thebrief/2013/03/14/regmi-sworn-in-2/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">appointed Khil Raj Regmi</a>,  who was then Nepal’s Chief Justice, as the chairman of the council of ministers. Regmi led a caretaker government and presided over the 2013 elections, and <a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/blogs/thebrief/2014/02/11/khil-raj-regmi-resigns-as-cj/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">resigned after the elections in February 2014</a>.In hindsight, this was a watershed moment for the erosion of the separation of powers within Nepal’s executive and judicial branches.In 2017, an<a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/blogs/thebrief/2017/05/01/lady-justice/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> impeachment motion </a>was filed against <a href="https://archive.nepalitimes.com/article/interview/a-woman-is-as-capable-sushila-karki,3375" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Chief Justice Sushila Karki</a> by the coalition government of the NC and the Maoists, who accused her of interfering with executive decisions after Justice Karki overturned the government’s choice for Nepal’s Chief of Police.Expert and public consensus at the time was that the impeachment served to intimidate the judiciary and Karki, who was noted for her integrity, independence and <a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/article/from-nepali-press/I-will-not-spare-the-corrupt,3156" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">aggressive stance on corruption</a>.Karki was reinstated after the single bench of Justice Rana issued an order against the impeachment motion.Rana’s tenure has not been without controversy, with the Chief Justice having come under scrutiny for reducing sentences of convicted murderers, acquitting individuals charged with corruption and manipulating favourable benches as favours to businessmen and politicians.Indeed, the controversy has also brought to light the practice of ‘bench buying’ in the Supreme Court, which Rana has been accused of facilitating. The decision on which cases have which benches assigned is so rife with corruption that bench-selection has become a money-making scam.An independent judiciary is the foundation of a functioning democracy and ensures that the branches of government operate within a system of checks and balances. But the controversy surrounding the Chief Justice, much more blatant than previous misgivings from within Nepal’s judiciary, has exposed the long-standing quid pro quo relationship between Nepal’s executive and judicial branches.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/non-government-of-nepal/">Non-government of Nepal</a>, Sonia Awale

Nepal’s lawyers on warpath against Chief Justice

<figure><img width="1040" height="550" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06c39c7e80680e0a5f80jpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>Nepali Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba will become prime minister for the fifth time on Tuesday. Photo: RSS</figcaption></figure>For many, the Supreme Court’s restoration on Monday of Nepal’s Parliament for the second time after it was dissolved by Prime Minister K P Oli was a foregone conclusion. What was unexpected was that the apex court also ordered Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress to succeed Oli as prime minister.And probably the person most surprised by that decision was Deuba himself.After all, the Constitutional Bench led by Chief Justice Cholendra JB Rana could not have given a different verdict than the one he gave in February when Oli dissolved the Lower House for the first time. But most commentators had felt that ruling on a strictly political matter of who should be prime minister, was a matter for Parliament and beyond the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.Chief Justice Rana and his bench obviously did not think so. Since the two demands (restoring the House and naming Deuba PM) were part of the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/parliamentary-whiplash/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">writ petitions filed in the courts by an alliance of anti-Oli parties</a>, he could not logically accept one while rejecting the other.The Court ordered that Deuba be installed as prime minister by 5pm on Tuesday, and for the House to be reconvened within one week. It also ruled that the 23 UML members who added their signatures to the petition against their own party should not be disciplined, which was also a claim in one of the writs. Deuba along with 146 MPs from his own party, with those from the Maoist Centre as well dissident factions of the JSP and the UML had filed the writ on 24 May, soon after President Bidya Bhandar rejected the claim by both the alliance and Oli that they had the majority in the House to form the next government.The Consitutitonal Bench had heard arguments by both the petitioners as well as government lawyers about whether it was the party whip or the individual member’s right to vote during a floor test in the House. Clearly, the Bench felt that MPs were free to vote of their own free will and did not have to always obey the party line.    <figure><img width="1200" height="700" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06c59c7e80680e0a5f81jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption>The Constitutional Bench made up of Chief Justice Cholendra JB Rana and justices Dipak Kumar Karki, Mira Khadka, Ishwar Khatiwada and Anandamohan Bhattarai.</figcaption></figure>Besides Rana, the Constitutional Bench was made up of justices selected on the basis of seniority including Dipak Kumar Karki, Mira Khadka, Ishwar Khatiwada and Anandamohan Bhattarai.Monday’s decision on the restoration of the House was expected, but few had thought the Supreme Court would go all the way to nominate Deuba and stop any action against the 23 UML dissidents.Taken together the three decisions represent a big setback for Oli, who had been holding on to power despite a mutiny within the former NCP party from an alliance of Pushpa Kamal Dahal Nepal, and later in his own UML.<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/court-debates-nepal-pm-olis-future/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Oli had used every trick in the book</a>, from divide and rule, getting members to defect from rival parties, dissolving Parliament and immediately after that staking claims to leadership.He was even working on a fall-back option till Monday morning in case the Supreme Court decided to restore the House. He had been trying to woo back the Nepal faction into the UML so that even if the House was restored, he could try for another majority in a month.Negotiators from both sides in a working group had come up with a 10-point deal to patch up differences between Oli and Nepal. But the Court decision has thrown that pact in the air.The Court decidedly did not agree that the same person could keep claiming to have a majority, and failing, every time. In fact, Oli must have seen it coming because it had been overturning one by one his increasingly desperate moves to remain in office right up to the court hearings on the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/president-endorses-parliament-dissolution/">second dissolution</a> of the Lower House on <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/">22 May.</a> Petitioners presenting their arguments at Court’s Constitutional Bench last month did not just call for the restoration of the House and Deuba be made prime minister but directly blamed President Bidya Devi Bhandari for complicity with Oli. <figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06c89c7e80680e0a5f82jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption>Photos: AMIT MACHAMASI</figcaption></figure><figure><img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06cb9c7e80680e0a5f83jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure><figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06cc9c7e80680e0a5f84jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure><figure><img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06cf9c7e80680e0a5f85jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure><figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06d19c7e80680e0a5f86jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure><figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110151112/636d06d39c7e80680e0a5f87jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption>Youth affiliated with the CPN-UML staged protests outside the Supreme Court against its verdict that guaranteed Sher Bahadur Deuba his fifth prime ministership.</figcaption></figure>The final verdict of the court marks the culmination of a prolonged power struggle between Oli and comrades within the UML and his former NCP that has lasted more than two years, and undermined one of the most powerful elected governments in Nepal’s democratic history.The NCP had nearly two-thirds majority in the House, but it was hobbled by a power struggle and ego-clash between Oli and the Dahal-Nepal combine. Governance was paralysed by uncertainty even as Nepal struggled with two deadly waves of the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdowns that has seriously damaged the economy.President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/">rejection of Deuba’s claim</a> to lead the government two months ago had prompted 146 politicians from a five-party alliance to file writ petitions in the Supreme Court on 24 May. After dissolving the House following loss in a confidence vote on 21 May, Oli still staked his claim to form a government, showing he had support of all the members of the UML and JSP – even those who had voted with Deuba.President Bhandari used this to cast doubt on the legitimacy of both claims to form the government because they had counted the same MPs.On Tuesday, Sher Bahadur Deuba will become Nepal’s prime minister for the fifth time in 20 years. He has led the country through the reign of King Birendra, after King Gyanendra’s coup in 2005, as well as in interim governments after the peace accord in 2006.Deuba will have to prove that he has the confidence of the House within one month, after which he will head an election government. If he fails to get a majority, which is a possibility, there will be early polls in November – which was what Oli was preparing for.Like Deuba, other leaders of the anti-Oli alliance have also been prime ministers before: Pushpa Kamal Dahal (twice), <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/making-up-is-hard-to-do/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Madhav Kumar Nepal</a>, Jhalnath Khanal and Baburam Bhattarai.

Nepal Court orders Deuba to succeed Oli

<figure><img width="1123" height="768" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111015118/636d06469c7e80680e0a5f53jpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>Illustration: SUBHAS RAI</figcaption></figure>We will finally know in 12 July the fate of the dissolved House, whether or not K P Oli stays on as prime minister, if Sher Bahadur Deuba becomes prime minister for the fifth time in 20 years, or if Nepalis have to vote in <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFNesP84u5FYPCAE0JHQ7tGcH5vng">early elections in November.</a>After two weeks of deliberations, on 12 July the Supreme Court’s Constitutional bench is set to decide on writ petitions challenging Prime Minister Oli’s dissolution of the Lower House and President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s rejection of leadership bids by both Deuba and Oli on 21 May. Throughout the submissions by petitioners and government lawyers, depositions by the four members of the amicus curiae, as well as questions from the bench, the debate has boiled down to this: in a multi-party democracy, does the party whip have more legitimacy in a floor test than a non-party individual vote?Can MPs from a ruling party seeking a confidence vote side against it, and even back the candidacy of an opposition leader to replace their own prime minister? There were spirited arguments by lawyers from both sides. The petitioners went beyond censuring Oli to accuse President Bhandari of complicity and failing in her duty to protect the Constitution from Oli’s ambition to cling on to power.Both Oli and his main challenger, former prime minister Madhav Kumar Nepal, have claimed that their actions were constitutional, and it was the other side that is acting against its letter and spirit.The Constitutional Bench itself was formed last month on the basis of seniority by Chief Justice Cholendra SJB Rana and includes Justices Dipak Kumar Karki, Anand Mohan Bhattarai, Mira Dhungana, Ishwar Prasad Khatiwada. We have no way of guessing which argument the individual justices will favour, but if <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/court-debates-nepal-pm-olis-future/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/court-debates-nepal-pm-olis-future/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF0IeOBH-TePa8tjGto_qMFeokPBw">some of its recent judgements</a> overturning Prime Minister Oli’s moves one by one are anything to go by, they may also restore the dissolved House on Monday.If you remember, after Prime Minister Oli got president Bhandari to dissolve the House for the second time on 21 May, Deuba of the Nepali Congress, Pushpa Kamal Dahal of the Maoist Centre and dissidents from Oli’s own UML and the JSP gathered 149 signatures to stake a claim to form the new government.Oli got wind of this, and also claimed majority support with all 122 members of his own party and 31 from the JSP, even though rebel factions from both parties had sided with the Deuba-led alliance. President Bhandari <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF6K9hFkxrMWBCiMeBy80xmpn1pHg">rejected both claims</a> saying two groups <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF6K9hFkxrMWBCiMeBy80xmpn1pHg">cannot claim a majority.</a> This prompted the politicians from the five-party alliance to file a slew of petitions in the Supreme Court on 24 May, not just challenging the dissolution of the house but also asking that Deuba be declared prime minister.The fact that the judiciary has to decide on who should be prime minister, which party has a majority in Parliament, shows just how dysfunctional Nepali politics has become. <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/making-up-is-hard-to-do/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/making-up-is-hard-to-do/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEYXsPhx5Xoxk-1WeogNXgzFBU-5Q">Just because two members from the executive arm cannot get along</a>, they have blurred the separation of powers and dragged the judiciary in to pass a verdict on a matter that should have been decided by the people’s elected representatives in the legislature.On Monday, we will know if the House will remain dissolved and Oli will lead an election government till polls on 12 and 19 November, or if the President will once more call for members to show a majority in one month. Which is why some young turks in the UML have been desperately trying to <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/tried-tested-and-failed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/tried-tested-and-failed/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEPXE3v8n_CAmyJqoIXutEQ6l1DuQ">prevent the party from splitting</a> because either way it needs to be together to confront the opposition coalition. If the UML unites, no matter what the Supreme Court’s verdict, the opposition alliance will fall apart.A UML working group has been desperately trying to patch up differences between Oli and Nepal, which is mostly an ego-clash, but also involves compromises like Oli backtracking from his induction of 23 Maoist MPs into the UML Central Committee that diluted Nepal’s clout in the party. Nepal wants either the prime minister ship or party chair, which Oli has flatly rejected. The bargaining goes on at <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/nepal-is-a-hotbed-of-virus-and-politics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/nepal-is-a-hotbed-of-virus-and-politics/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1625735264179000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFwzdLgJtcZp-xLj40y47gZymEdHg">great cost to governance</a> at a time when the country faces a pandemic, a disastrous monsoon and an economic crisis. Hopefully, by this time next week the Supreme Court verdict will show us a way out of this rigmarole.

Parliamentary whiplash

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b94129c7e80680e06f1dbjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="1000"/><figcaption>Illustration: DIWAKAR CHETTRI</figcaption></figure>Nepal’s Supreme Court has been overturning Prime Minister K P Oli’s moves to remain in office one by one, even as it began crucial hearings on his <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/president-endorses-parliament-dissolution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/president-endorses-parliament-dissolution/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFcfwSAhJcN3o2YRfc09cycuI6fLg">second dissolution</a> of the Lower House on <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGn9_SCp2XoTEVx1Y1q1wFMB0pVQQ">22 May.</a>Lawyers presenting their arguments at the Court’s Constitutional Bench on Wednesday and Thursday went beyond just <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepalis-outraged-by-pm-oli-move/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepalis-outraged-by-pm-oli-move/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGyc7SBPAkNZ8daTmk8Xf4bMvaGpA">questioning Oli’s moves</a>, they blamed President Bidya Devi Bhandari for complicity.And beyond calling for a restoration of the House, they also demanded that Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress (NC) replace Oli, since he had amply demonstrated a majority in the House.The final battle in the court is the culmination of a long-drawn power struggle between Oli and comrades within the UML and his former NCP, even while the country faces an emergency with the coronavirus pandemic.President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEfhpSOMM9zO0aa-OOH9pv0unohLw">rejection of Deuba’s claim</a> to lead the government two months ago had prompted 146 politicians from a five-party alliance to file writ petitions in the Supreme Court on 24 May.<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b94159c7e80680e06f1dcjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1698" height="1272"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>Chief Justice Cholendra SJB Rana and Justices Deep Kumar Karki, Mira Khadka, Iswar Prasad Khatiwada and Ananda Mohan Bhattarai will give a final verdict after a stipulated 32 hours of hearings over the next two weeks.That ruling will determine whether the House is reinstated and if Deuba becomes prime minister for the fifth time, or if Oli continues as prime minister to oversee early elections in November. If the House is reinstated, the five-party alliance could also choose some other prime minister.Like Deuba, other leaders of the anti-Oli alliance have also been prime ministers before: Pushpa Kamal Dahal (twice), Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhalnath Khanal and Baburam Bhattarai.The signs do not look good for Oli whose latest setback was the Supreme Court’s decision on Tuesday reversing his <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-government-reshuffle-during-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-government-reshuffle-during-pandemic/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEucL_TDQmSld75IHcEemzl7UaY9g">appointment of 20 ministers</a>earlier this month, saying it was unconstitutional for a caretaker prime minister to do so.In fact, Water Supply Minister Anil Jha of the JSP was being welcomed in his constituency in Rautahat on Tuesday when word came from Kathmandu that the Court had directed all Cabinet ministers to stop working. And in a show of defiance, Oli told deposed ministers they didn’t need to vacate their official residence because “something will come up”.In the midst of a pandemic, Nepal's governing Cabinet is now down to Oli and four ministers. The third health minister in a year was among the 20 who had to step down this week after just 19 days in office.The five-party opposition alliance decided to put pressure on Oli by launching street protests starting on Thursday. Speaking to a gathering of editors on Thursday, the NC's Deuba said: "The prime minister and president colluded at midnight to dismantle democracy and the constitution, that is why we have formed this alliance. We will mobilise the public if needed, to fight against a return to authoritarianism."<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b94189c7e80680e06f1ddjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="720" height="480"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b941a9c7e80680e06f1dejpeg.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="640"><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b941d9c7e80680e06f1dfjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="642">Last week, the Supreme Court overturned a Cabinet decision to amend national park regulations so that Yeti Holdings got a license to build a hydroelectric plant in Langtang. The Court also over-ruled an attempt by Oli to allow ministers to automatically become ambassadors, without having to be graduates. Then, Oli’s loyalist chief minister in the UML was voted out of the Gandaki provincial government last week by a coalition of opposition parties.At the Constitutional Bench, the petitioners and the government’s defence lawyers have been allocated 15 hours each to present their case, after which four lawyers from an amicus curiae will be given two hours to give their opinion.Central to the argument will be whether President Bhandari was fair in rejecting claims by both Deuba and Oli that they had a majority in the House to form a new government. On 21 May, Oli claimed he had the support of a majority in the House that he had himself dissolved earlier, by counting the total membership of his own UML and the Janata Samajbadi Party (JSP) — even those in both parties who had defected to Deuba’s camp.Deuba presented President Bhandari with 149 actual signatures of MPs from the NC, Maoist Centre (MC) and dissidents from the UML and JSP. Only 136 votes are needed for a majority based on the current House strength.On Wednesday and Thursday, petitioners at the Constitutional Bench argued that Article 76 (5) of the Constitution clearly stated that if a prime minister cannot demonstrate he has the confidence of the House, the president has to call on any member who can do so to form the next government.Firebrand lawyer Sambhu Thapa argued: “Why does the president require any other proof other than the 149 signatures? Who gave the president the authority to choose her own prime minister, or take away the right of House members to vote? This is a right that was earned after a long political struggle.”<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b941f9c7e80680e06f1e0jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="640"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b94229c7e80680e06f1e1jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="642"><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121148/636b94249c7e80680e06f1e2jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="640">Last week President Bhandari’s office responded to a show cause from the Court with a written explanation that the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-supreme-court-restores-house/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-supreme-court-restores-house/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHluN7S9Tlzf7kz7vsDIVxJidoQig">Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction</a> over the Office of the President. The President’s advisers have said that she took the decision to dissolve the House because the support of some MPs was claimed by both Deuba and Oli.In his clarification letter to the Supreme Court, Oli argued that the Court had no role in a purely political matter.In Thursday’s Constitutional Bench hearings, former attorney general Raman Shrestha argued that the President was claiming a right over the Supreme Court similar to what Nepal’s kings had during the monarchy days.“This debate in the Court is not about Oli or Deuba becoming prime minister, it is about whether a Constitution drafted by an elected Constituent Assembly will remain or not,” Shrestha said.Another lawyer Badri Bahadur Karki argued that a decision on whether Deuba had a majority support of the House or not was not up to the president. “The president invoking Article 76(5) was for the formation of an alternative government, not to reinstate the same government,” Karki argued, adding in English, “the president should have told Oli, you are no more prime minister.”Oli, who has survived many earlier cliffhangers, probably expects the Supreme Court to reinstate the House, and he is planning to demonstrate a majority by <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-pm-oli-back-on-saddle/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-pm-oli-back-on-saddle/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEA1z9mRfljFFGu7HLVClQWlwriyg">wooing back dissident UML MP</a>s and the JSP floor test. Oli will need at least 114 of the total 121 members of the UML as well as at least 20 from the Mahanta Thakur faction of the JSP <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/parliamentary-arithmetics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/parliamentary-arithmetics/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1624615526031000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFHTBsAGOKmQ3mM0AWKIqW3ykM03w">to prove a House majority</a>.However, the tenor of the court hearings this week prove that they will not be satisfied with the restoration of the House — they want President Bhandari’s decision to disqualify Deuba’s claim to be prime minister revoked.

Oli's gambit

<figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86329c7e80680e067839jpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>All photos: AMIT MACHAMASI</figcaption></figure>An alliance of five political parties and factions opposed to Prime Minister K P Oli’s <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dissolution of the House and call for early elections </a>have approached the Supreme Court with a writ petition to have the move overturned. The five who went to the Supreme Court on Monday included the Nepali Congress (NC), Maoist Centre (MC), the Yadav-Bhattarai faction of the Janata Samajbadi Party (JSP) and dissidents from Oli’s own UML, as well as the 146 signatories.PM Oli's UML immediately evicted 11 rebel members including Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhalnath Khanal and Bhim Rawal from the party, and asked 12 others for a clarification within 24 hours. The writ petition asks the Court to rule that since Sher Bahadur Deuba of the NC had <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/">staked his claim</a> to form the new government with a majority in Parliament, he should be appointed prime minister. It also asks that since the House dissolution was un-constitutional, it should be reinstated. All signatories from the five groups were present at the Court to register the petition, led by Deuba, MC Chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal, UML’s Madhav Kumar Nepal and JSP’s Upendra Yadav, and Durga Poudel of the Janmorcha. However, only 23 of the 26 who were originally with the Nepal faction signed. <img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86359c7e80680e06783ajpeg.jpg" alt="">Meanwhile, the main JSP led by Mahanta Thakur and Rajendra Mahato has decided to join K P Oli’s election government after being assured of seven ministerial portfolios. The party took the decision after the Cabinet got President Bhandari’s seal of approval on an ordinance passing a bill that would grant citizenship by descent to children of Nepali parents — a long-standing demand of the Mahdesi community.Although Oli and his party had vehemently opposed the bill last year, saying that it would allow Indians to marry Nepalis and for their children to be citizens, it appears that he has agreed to it now to save his government. The other JSP demand for the release of MP Resham Chaudhary, who has been detained for the massacre of policemen Tikapur in August 2015, has not yet been met.The latest political crisis in Nepal in the middle of a raging Covid-19 second wave started when President Bidya Devi Bhandari gave parties in Parliament 21 hours on Wednesday to stake their claim to form the next government because Prime Minister Oli said he could not get majority support from MPs.  <img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86389c7e80680e06783bjpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="640" height="427" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b863a9c7e80680e06783cjpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="960" height="641" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b863c9c7e80680e06783djpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="750" height="500" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86409c7e80680e06783ejpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86429c7e80680e06783fjpeg.jpg" alt="">However, after the NC, MC and the JSP and UML factions collected 149 signatures, Oli rushed to Shital Niwas to put forward support of all members of his UMl and the JSP, even the ones who had sides with the opposition coalition. This was seen by many as a violation of the constitution.President Bhandari on Saturday 2AM dissolved Parliament and called fresh elections in November, because she said neither side had fulfilled the requirement to form a new government.In the past two days, the prime minister and president have come under blistering attack from not just the opposition, but a cross section of civil society and media commentators. The student wing of the NC has been staging small protests in the capital despite the lockdown, burning Prime Minister Oli and President Bhandari in effigy.  <figure><img width="960" height="637" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86449c7e80680e067840jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption>A student group trying to burn the prime minister and president in effigy were apprehended by police on Sunday. Photo: Amit Machamasi</figcaption></figure>Nepali Times discussed recent political developments with Nepal’s politicians. <img width="113" height="164" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86479c7e80680e067841jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"There was no choice but to dissolve parliament" Niru Pal, CPN (UML)</h2> PM Oli was not able to get a vote of confidence per article 76 (4) of the constitution, and as such, Parliament was not able to come up with a solution. The opposition had been setting up constant roadblocks against PM Oli, all the while failing to establish a majority to form a government. Consequently, a government could not be formed as per Article 76 (5) of the Constitution either. We got word that MPs from our party had signed in favour of Sher Bahadur Deuba to become prime minister as if this were an independent political system. However, 11 of them have issued a statement alleging misuse of signatures. Therefore the government had no choice but to dissolve Parliament.I find some absurd and unnecessary criticism of PM Oli. Those critics are also well aware that the President is not an executive, and had no grounds to block the recommendation of the caretaker Prime Minister. The President would have made the same decision even if it were Sher Bahadur Deuba in PM Oli’s position. She has decided based on the spirit of the constitution. <h2>"An Oli-led election will self-destruct" Ganesh Shah, Maoist Centre</h2> PM Oli’s loyalists and his opponents have become polarised. The opposition was unable to take unified and effective action against PM Oli’s unconstitutional move, which is the result of his ambition and arrogance. The first parliament dissolution was a blow to our Constitution, but this dissolution might be its death knell.  <img width="172" height="248" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86489c7e80680e067842jpeg.jpg" alt="">Civil society and the backers of the Constitution and democracy must fight against this political regression with a unified front. The legal process will not be enough — Parliament must be re-established through political initiative. The chances of an election taking place are slim. Moreover, an election under Oli’s leadership will be self-destructive. Any election at this point must be held only after a re-instated Parliament elects a new Prime Minister. <img width="170" height="246" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86499c7e80680e067843jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"The PM always wanted to dissolve parliament" Rachana Khadka, CPN (UML)</h2> PM Oli always wanted to dissolve parliaments and he did — twice.  Even after the Supreme Court reinstated the lower House in January, all of his recent political moves showed he was going to do it again. The decision to dissolve a Parliament in which he once held a majority is ironic. It goes against the spirit of the Constitution.Moreover, the legitimacy of the President’s office has also come into question. We have a system of checks and balances to ensure that our political institutions hold one another accountable if mistakes are made. As such, the office of the President does not exist to do the prime minister’s bidding.Hundreds of Nepalis are dying due to Covid-19 every day. The primary focus at this time should have been to save lives. Dissolving the parliament at a time like this is like dancing over the pyres of Nepalis. The state elections in India contributed to the spread of the virus over there. We should have learned our lesson from our neighbours. <h2>"Parliament dissolution is constitutional" Ashok Vyanju, President, Municipal Association</h2> This is the result of the inability of a democratically elected institution to facilitate nation-building, inter-political coordination and balance. The dissolution of Parliament and announcement of elections came after it was not possible to form a government constitutionally. The decision is therefore absolutely constitutional. The election will  make it possible to pursue a fresh mandate after our political problems are resolved. <img width="149" height="215" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864a9c7e80680e067844jpeg.jpg" alt="">Some have wrongly questioned the possibility of an election during a pandemic. India, South Korea, Japan, and other countries successfully conducted elections in the middle of the pandemic. We must be able to combat the virus and resolve our political problems simultaneously. <img width="176" height="250" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864b9c7e80680e067845jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"Legal and political measures must be followed" Dila Sangroula, Nepali Congress</h2> The incumbent Prime Minister had to take a vote of confidence within 30 days or resign as per article 76 (3) of the constitution. Even then, the NC, MC, and JSP coalition along with the Nepal faction of the UML had collected 149 signatures to form a new government following the president’s directive.However, the signatures to appoint Sher Bahadur Deuba the Prime Minister were considered illegitimate. The subsequent decision to dissolve parliament at midnight was unconstitutional, undemocratic and reactionary. Legal and political countermeasures must be pursued to undo it.The announcement of mid-term elections during a pandemic, when Nepalis are dying due to a scarcity of oxygen and ventilators, is nothing but a political drama staged by Oli in an attempt to hold on to power.  Why are we enabling this instead of trying to save lives? <h2>"A free and fair election must be ensured" Mohan Shrestha, RPP</h2> The two major Communist parties failed to deliver on the promises made when they were elected into government. NC and RPP are not to blame for their failure. As such, it is better to go to the polls than to continue like this. All of our political parties should establish an understanding as we move forward, and a free and fair election must be ensured. <img width="117" height="168" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864c9c7e80680e067846jpeg.jpg" alt="">We are in favour of the election, and an official statement from the RPP will come soon. However, we have no involvement in the polarised politics on both sides, and will not participate in any anti-Oil protests. West Bengal and the United States conducted elections during the pandemic. We must follow all safety protocols pertaining to the pandemic and do the same.  <img width="318" height="376" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864d9c7e80680e067847jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"We must form a new party" Asta Laxmi Shakya, CPN (UML)</h2> After the Supreme Court overturned the NCPO, we came back to UML. But (PM Oli) did not give us any importance. He is still ignoring us. We cannot rely on Oli, we have to forge a new path. We have to form a new party, and not prolong this uncertainty.

Political ball now in Nepal’s Supreme Court

One smoggy winter morning in February 2019, Ekta regretted coming to her sculpture class. It was the first day of her period, and the 19-year-old wished she was home, curled up in bed with a hot water bag to soothe her cramps.
Her class was at Kalapremi Ceramic Studio, a dark room on the ground floor of a house in Maharajganj, and Ekta’s teacher was the artist Gopal Das Shrestha ‘Kalapremi’, a noted sculptor.
Two other students were already there, using all their muscle strength to knead the sculpting clay. Ekta, now 24, recalls how Kalapremi asked her if she was feeling all right. She avoided him, as she did not want everyone to know she was menstruating.
Kalapremi repeatedly asked Ekta what was wrong. She finally muttered that she was having her period, after which he grabbed her hand and led her to a partitioned corner of the studio and sat her on a chair. Before she could stop him, he slid his hand under her dress, and started massaging her abdomen.
“I was horrified,” Ekta recalls. “I told him to stop, but he didn’t listen, asking me not to be shy, saying he knew how to relieve my pain. He stopped only after I protested furiously.”&nbsp;
The art tutor then said, “You’re like my daughter. I’m doing it out of love to make you feel better, but you’re so stubborn.”&nbsp;
“Instead of saying sorry he acted like I was the one having crazy thoughts,” remembers Ekta, adding that from April 2016 to August 2020 beginning the time she was 16, the artist sexually abused and harassed her on several occasions. &nbsp;
Now, Ekta and the artist’s other former students are finally sharing their experiences and some are pressing legal charges against him, hoping that others do not have to endure what they did.&nbsp;
Award-winning artist and teacher Gopal Das Shrestha ‘Kalapremi’ (the name means ‘Art Lover’) is known for his ceramic art, sculpture, and contemporary pottery. He was <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/review/the-house-of-kalapremi">profiled in Nepali Times after a collaborative exhibition</a>, ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ at the Siddhartha Art Gallery three years ago.&nbsp;
His pieces, titled Gaalis, featured sculpted female figures with the heads of dogs, sheep, and donkeys (pictured) to depict derogatory terms for women. Some critics said the collection was a satire on feminists.
Kalapremi started his artistic and teaching career in 1983 and over the years taught at Bhanubhakta School, Kathmandu University School of Arts, Lalitkala Campus and at his private Kalapremi Ceramic Studio. He has also lectured at Jeonju University in South Korea and recently at Tabor Academy in the United States.
Seven of Kalapremi’s former students were interviewed for this story. Five female students said he touched them inappropriately in his studio or at Kathmandu University. Two male students said they witnessed him abuse and harass the women. In all cases, the students struggled to recognise the abuse when it occurred, and the lack of reporting systems left them to cope on their own for years.&nbsp;
Earlier this year, students shared a social media post hinting at Kalapremi’s history of abusive behaviour following which more students of the artist reached out sharing similar experiences. Some students spoke of abuse that happened as long as 20 years ago.
Kalapremi, 60, has denied the allegations. He told Nepali Times: “Some years ago, there was a movement encouraging people to hug and kiss. I used to do it purely out of friendship and love. But after seeing posts on social media last year calling out my behaviour, I realised my actions may have hurt some people. I understand now that I should have been more mindful.”
He added: “I am also an auxiliary health worker, so I know the exact points to massage to relieve menstrual pain. It’s not just menstruation, I take anyone who is ill to the hospital.”
Sexual abuse is much more rampant than reported given how difficult it is to prove it in court. The law defines sexual abuse as occuring when someone touches another’s private parts, coerces them into touching theirs, uses vulgar language, shows degrading images, or behaves indecently towards them without consent.&nbsp;
Ekta and her fellow students are consulting lawyer Suneeta Regmi Pokhrel, who says they know that even if the court decides in their favour, it is difficult to survive after speaking up, and influential men defend themselves saying they are being framed.&nbsp;
“They are in a lot of pain and weep when recalling how he abused them,” Regmi Pokhrel told us. “They are angry and have filed a case against him, but they are also terrified. They know he is a powerful man and they have seen how our society treats women who speak up against abusers. Unless people speak up, perpetrators will be emboldened.”
Art and academia in Nepal simply reflect the power imbalances in society where people with intersecting identities experience worse forms of abuse. Theatre actors Raj Kumar Pudasaini, Rajan Khatiwada, and Sunil Pokhrel were called out during the #MeToo movement in the Nepali theatre scene in 2019. Even after the allegations Pokhrel went on to receive national awards, while others continued to work without repercussions.
“If you speak up against abusers, you gradually get sidelined from projects,” explained a theatre artist who wished anonymity fearing professional setbacks. “The theatre scene in Nepal is quite small, you just have to make peace with the perpetrators and work with them if you want to sustain yourself.”&nbsp;
In academia there is a history of faculty members sexually harassing students and getting away with it. After Tribhuvan University (TU) lecturer Krishna Bhattachan was accused of harassing women students, the university said it would follow Nepal’s sexual harassment law and set up a reporting mechanism. But nothing happened to the professor, who had already retired. Instead, he counter-accused the students of 'attacking the indigenous people’s movement with baseless allegations' as <a href="https://kathmandupost.com/letters/2019/01/29/bhattachan-responds">he told the Kathmandu Post in 2019</a>. He continues to be featured as a prominent speaker including at TU.
Other faculty members previously accused of sexual harassment include Jagadish Murti Koirala from TU, Bishnu Prasad Acharya from Ratna Rajya Campus, and Bodha Raj Tripathee from Lalitpur Madhyamik Vidhyalaya. A woman staff member from TU also filed a sexual abuse complaint against Dambar Chemjong from TU.
Prominent figures like <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/the-rise-and-fall-of-nims-purja">mountaineer Nims Purja</a> have been <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/31/sports/mountaineering-sexual-harassment-abuse-nims-purja.html">accused of sexual assault</a>, and cricketer Sandeep Lamichhane, actor <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/celebrity-rape-case-spotlights-nepal-laws">Paul Shah</a>, and former speaker of Parliament <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/mahara-arrested">Krishna Bahadur Mahara</a> have been accused of rape, but society-at-large has let off the alleged perpetrators amdist a larger debate about justice for survivors and punishment of perpetrators.&nbsp;
‘Gaushala-26’ is the court name given to the 18-year-old who accused Sandeep Lamichhane, former captain of Nepal’s national cricket team and skipper of Biratnagar Kings in the <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/here-comes-the-nepal-premier-league">ongoing Nepal Premier League</a>, of rape. She left the country citing society questioning her character affecting her mental health while Lamichhane got an outpouring of support. In May, the Patan High Court overturned a prior verdict that found Lamichhane guilty of rape and had sentenced him to eight years in prison. During the 23-month legal battle to pursue justice, Gaushala-26 faced threats of gang rape and acid attacks.&nbsp;
Exhausted by the struggle, Gaushala-26 sought to “move to a new world” where she could live free without hiding her identity.
Actress Samragyee Rajya Laxmi Shah in an Instagram video now deleted detailed the harassment she faced from a filmmaker during a movie shoot. She did not name any name but veteran actor Bhuwan KC filed a defamation case against Rana, but the court ruled that the charge lacked sufficient evidence.&nbsp;
Former Kathmandu mayor <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/theytoo">Keshav Sthapit also mocked the #MeToo movement</a>, calling accusations against him by journalists Rashmila Prajapati and Ujjwala Maharjan “a rape of men’s rights”.
Serial Abuse
Back at the Kalapremi Ceramics studio, another former student, 24-year-old Rajiv, says he felt the need to speak out after seeing his female classmates being abused.&nbsp;
“He frequently kissed them on their cheeks,” he told Nepali Times. “Whenever they walked into the studio he flailed his arms like a child asking for a hug. They awkwardly hugged him from the side, but he pulled them closer, held their chin, and kissed their cheeks.”&nbsp;
Rajiv says he also saw Kalapremi pull the women’s bra straps, touch their breasts, and slap their buttocks. The young students would freeze, not knowing how to react, and if they protested, he would say it was “normal in art”. Rajiv, 19 at the time like his classmates, remembers thinking perhaps the well-respected artist was right after all.
Another student, Luna, who took lessons at Kalapremi’s studio from 2020 to 2022 did try to confront the tutor after he made an obscene proposal to her. She recalls: “One day when the other students had left the studio and it was just the two of us, he told me that God had given him special artistic talent and he could transfer those powers to me. But to do that both of us will have to be naked, inside a dark room, and have sex.”
Luna, who was 18 then, was livid and told him she did not want any of his powers, but she says he laughed at her as if he was joking. She did not tell her family about the incident because she thought no one would believe her.&nbsp;
“They were all in awe of this famous artist and felt I should be grateful that to be learning sculpting from him,” she says. “I was scared to be alone with him in case he talked about sex again. My coping mechanism was to be rude so he wouldn’t try to come close to me.”
Seeing how some classmates were standing up to Kalapremi, Ekta too tried to push back against his advances, but she said he found ways to coerce her. Since Ekta, Rajiv, and Luna could not afford Kalapremi’s Rs30,000 monthly fee for lessons, he had offered them all a stipend to assist him in the studio.
“He had spondylosis and took me to his therapy sessions to learn massage techniques, then he often made me and other students massage him,” says Ekta. Whenever she refused, he would feign pain to make her feel sorry for him. “He would insist that I put my hands under his shirt so that I could massage him better,” she adds.
The art tutor often tried to “seduce sympathy” from Ekta by sharing how he had never been loved as a child and was “sexually frustrated” as an adult.&nbsp;
“At 7PM, he would pour himself Signature whiskey and immediately go off again about how he was sex-starved. I didn’t know how to respond. It took me time to realise alcohol was just an excuse to talk about sex,” Ekta says.
If convicted, Kalapremi could face financial penalty and/or a prison sentence of up to three years according to Section 224 of National Penal (Code) Act 2017.&nbsp;
Data suggests that victims of child sexual abuse on average take nearly 24 years to tell someone about their trauma, and some may never disclose it at all.&nbsp;
“In our culture, children are rarely taught about boundaries. They often react, show anger when adults pinch their cheeks. But adults insist they did it out of love, and force the children to accept it,” says Sita Lama, a psychotherapist at Manka Kura. “And even when someone touches them inappropriately they struggle to identify and verbalise it.”
When perpetrators claim to be “acting out of love”, Lama says survivors are likely to perceive it as something safe, rather than recognising it as abuse.&nbsp;
“It may take years for them to realise they were abused,” she explains. "And even when they become aware, the power imbalance with the abuser and the associated shame often prevents survivors from speaking up."
Other former students from the School of Art at Kathmandu University have also come forward years later, saying Kalapremi sexually abused them. As young adults, they felt his behaviour was off but were uncertain if it was inappropriate, illegal, or they did not know how to respond. After having understood that it was indeed abuse, they say they are speaking out now to protect others.&nbsp;
Amina Singh, a visiting faculty member at Kathmandu University, says there is no clause against sexual abuse in contracts of teachers, and there is no formal grievance handling mechanism for the students.&nbsp;
“So the only way students can to deal with sexual abuse is approach someone they trust,” she says.
Eight other former art students of Lalit Kala Campus and Srijana College of Fine Arts of Tribhuvan University and other private art studios in Kathmandu say they were also sexually abused by their art teachers. Three faculty members interviewed from these institutions said they saw the abuse, but felt it was futile to report it given how powerful the teachers were.
In the absence of a formal system, some longtime women artists warned each other about “problematic” artists. They shared &nbsp;a “heads-up” to be more cautious when collaborating with them, and avoided responding to their calls and texts after work hours.
To ensure art institutions are safe for all, galleries, museums, artist studios, and smaller art spaces need to develop policies on sexual harassment. This would include a code of conduct or studio policies that hold the leadership accountable and outline the principles of professional ethics.&nbsp;
Students and employees should inquire about accountability mechanisms for raising concerns, both formally and informally, advocates say.
Three years after Ekta left the ceramics studio, she learnt that Kalapremi had harassed many other women. Still trying to get a footing in the art industry, she attended a workshop in Kathmandu where women artists discussed ways to stay safe in the art sector.&nbsp;
Since it was a close-knit group Ekta opened up about how she felt violated and realised she was not alone, he had been abusing underprivileged students for years, and this was common knowledge among artists in Nepal.
Ekta says that even after she quit, Kalapremi continued sending her text messages like ‘I am thinking of you’, ‘Why have you stopped speaking with me’, or ‘I am waiting for your call’.&nbsp;
But what really forced her to act was when Ekta found out that he was sending similar texts to her younger sister.&nbsp;
“I’ve had enough,” she told us. “He abused me all these years but I won’t let him abuse my sister.” &nbsp;
Ekta, Rajiv and Luna are not the real names of the students.&nbsp;

‘Art Lover’ accused of sexual abuse

It was 8:15 in the evening of 25 March 1968 when everyone in the village of Batulechaur near Pokhara heard a deafening sound like thunder as a bright flashing object hurtled down to land in a field.&nbsp; That field belonged to Kul Timilsina, and the next morning he retrieved a sheet of metal about 2m by 1m and carried it home with the help of a few others, thinking it would be useful for his buffalo shed.&nbsp; Before he died at age 83 three years ago, Timilsina had told photo archivist Sunil Ulak that the black metal sheet was not rectangular and had rounded corners. There are a few witnesses still alive who have a clear recollection of the object that fell from the sky that night.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2024120707128_75cc85aac56b9cc4a77366471f058d7b3eb6868776811b0923845c2d0a61f014.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="2024120707128_75cc85aac56b9cc4a77366471f058d7b3eb6868776811b0923845c2d0a61f014" data-rendition-name="original" width="1170" height="601" loading="lazy" alt="UFO over Pokhara"> <figcaption>The field in Batulechaur belonging to Kul Timilsina where fragments of a flying object fell from the sky in 1968.</figcaption> </figure>  One of them is Timilsina’s wife Gyanu, who was 22 at the time. She had been at home, and remembers hearing the big bang and the sky becoming very bright. “We saw the thing in the field in the morning,” she told us. “It looked like a lid, a covering of some sort. The way it was stuck in the ground, it must have fallen from the sky. We thought we could use it to dry clothes on, and took it home.”&nbsp; Another witness is Kul Narayan Paudel. “I was only eight then. We ran to the field to see what had fallen. It was a four-sided metal sheet. The elders took it away, and I don't know what happened to it.” &nbsp; Ram Bahadur Baniya, a teacher at the local school, says he had heard the sheet had been brought to the school, and later handed over to the Zonal Commissioner at the time, Nanda Prasad Malla. “But that is all hearsay,” he says.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2024120707128_0bf207a12063fb8155b3c8d9a00a94887b126380c9e0627527c84cf5e1101f54.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="2024120707128_0bf207a12063fb8155b3c8d9a00a94887b126380c9e0627527c84cf5e1101f54" data-rendition-name="original" width="1170" height="610" loading="lazy" alt="UFO over Pokhara"> <figcaption>Gyanu Timilsina, wife of Kul Timilsina.</figcaption> </figure>  There are two versions of what happened to Kul Timilsina’s metal sheet. One is that an American Peace Corp Volunteer teaching at the nearby Bindyabasini School took it, and another is that it was handed over to the government. Recently declassified Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and US State Department documents from the time say that the US Embassy in Kathmandu tracked down the object two years later and had it shipped back to the US. A telegram from the Department of State and Department of Defense tagged as ‘MOON DUST / Space Fragments’ dated 1 March 1972 stated: ‘1. Restored space fragment will be on board Embassy support flight 115 arriving Kathmandu on or about March 10. Fragment is packed in shipping crate (cargo no. 72-33365) marked in care of DAO.&nbsp; 2. State and Defense representatives examined fragments prior to shipment finding restoration acceptable.’  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20241207071212_929d903ee06d41baa4f6040e981cd7c7d7bd75cc9c37c9b617d307fc8538d2df.png" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="20241207071212_929d903ee06d41baa4f6040e981cd7c7d7bd75cc9c37c9b617d307fc8538d2df" data-rendition-name="original" width="856" height="568" loading="lazy" alt="UFO over Pokhara"> <figcaption>Declassified CIA documents about the investigation into the object sighted in Pokhara. </figcaption> </figure>  The documents show that the US government, military and intelligence agencies investigated this incident thoroughly when it occurred, and have continued to revisit it ever since, as recently as five years ago. What is even more intriguing is that the object that fell in Pokhara was not the only unidentified space object that fell to earth that year. There were similar sightings of objects falling from the sky in Ladakh, Sikkim and Bhutan between 19 February and 25 March 1968.&nbsp; These mysteries were the subject of a CIA investigation in 1968 titled ‘<a href="https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81R00560R000100070007-8.pdf">Sighting of Unidentified Flying Objects in Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan</a>’, and the report is part of the recent online declassification of 800,000 top-secret documents from the period.&nbsp; &nbsp;Although unidentified flying objects (UFOs) have a connotation now of being alien craft, it could be pieces of satellite, missile, rocket or even aircraft. The CIA report documents six sightings in 1968 and quotes local sources as describing all of them having similar characteristics: bright blue or red streaks in the sky accompanied by loud sounds like lightning and thunder and objects falling to the ground. Aside from the metallic object that was found in Batlechaur, there were other items also found nearby in Tallakot, Tureypasal, Armalakot and Maidan. Whatever the object was, it seems to have disintegrated even before it hit the ground.&nbsp; The CIA report records the first sighting on 19 February 1968 in various parts of Sikkim and Olangchung Gola and Ghunsa in eastern Nepal. The light was said to be ‘long and thin’ and giving out ‘green and red light’. &nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20241207071212_c3c825027d966a2aedc846970390eebe063957503c7eacc8e01e0517843f9bbb.png" data-media-id="editor_4" data-image-id="20241207071212_c3c825027d966a2aedc846970390eebe063957503c7eacc8e01e0517843f9bbb" data-rendition-name="original" width="892" height="596" loading="lazy" alt="UFO over Pokhara "> </figure>  Two days later on 21 February, a soundless blue object was seen traveling fast across the sky above Thimphu in Bhutan. Then on 4 March there were multiple daytime sightings or white streaks in the sky at Chang La Pass, Fukche and Koyul in Ladakh. There were more sightings in Ladakh on the very day fragments fell near Pokhara on 25 March 1968.&nbsp; After the sightings in Pokhara, rumours started flying in Kathmandu that these were aliens trying to land on Earth, it could be Russian or Chinese spy planes or satellites, and some even say it as a sign from heaven that the end of the world was near. This was at the height of the Cold War. The Russians and Americans were testing their thermonuclear devices as well as intercontinental ballistic missile delivery systems. The Washington-Beijing rapprochement had not yet happened, and China was making quick progress testing atomic bombs. Within two years after its first atomic test, in 1966 China exploded its first hydrogen bomb at the Lop Nur site in Xinjiang, 3,000km to the north from Nepal. After neary six decades, what is still intriguing is that all the sightings within a few months of each other in 1968 were along the Himalayan arc bordering Tibet: from Bhutan, Sikkim Nepal, to Ladakh. The US military intelligence seems to have concluded that this was not a coincidence and there were frequent research trips to the site in Pokhara by American officials in the months after the incident. With the help of the Royal Nepal Army, the region north of Pokhara was thoroughly searched.&nbsp; A confidential memo dated 25 June 1968 by Jerry C Trippy to a ‘Mr Farley’ mentions that the US Air Force’s Foreign Technology Division had decided that the debris could be important because it may be related to a Chinese missile test or a Soviet ‘Vehicle Venik’ rocket.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20241207071216_feb5425692dc36b20187de4e4fcc2ce9fd12b6d9e1b8724398e50bcdbf9032fe.jpg" data-media-id="editor_5" data-image-id="20241207071216_feb5425692dc36b20187de4e4fcc2ce9fd12b6d9e1b8724398e50bcdbf9032fe" data-rendition-name="original" width="1500" height="1000" loading="lazy" alt="UFO over Pokhara"> </figure>  On 28 August 1968 the US Embassy in Kathmandu sent a letter to Washington DC saying that the object could be of Soviet origin, possibly from when the rocket carrying the ‘Kosmos 208’ satellite re-entered the atmosphere. But why were the fragments falling to earth several weeks apart, and in the same region? No one knows where the metal sheet that Kul Timilsina recovered is now. It was definitely packed in a crate and taken to the US, and although it is rumoured that it was returned that is not very likely. Archivist Sunil Ulak heard from the Timilsina family that CIA officials had returned to the site five years ago. &nbsp; Interest in UFOs peaked in the US in the 1950s, with the Cold War space race and tests of atomic weapons and delivery rockets. CIA and scientists were being sent to investigate sightings, both publicly and privately. Could the Pokhara fragments as well as the sightings in Ladakh and Bhutan actually be alien craft falling to earth? The renewal in interest in space travel in large part due to Elon Musk’s SpaceX, UFOs and sightings are again subjects of public interest.&nbsp; Even 57 years later, even if there was definitive proof about whether the Batlechaur fragment was from a Chinese missile or a soviet rocket, it has not been made public in documents declassified so far. We may never know.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20241207071216_b6938795f40731e7657fd6dcbb3cf460a326186a15eb11d4f832f602201ff598.jpg" data-media-id="editor_6" data-image-id="20241207071216_b6938795f40731e7657fd6dcbb3cf460a326186a15eb11d4f832f602201ff598" data-rendition-name="original" width="642" height="320" loading="lazy" alt="UFO over Pokhara"> </figure>  Sunil Ulak speculates if the debris actually came from an American aircraft, perhaps on an intel mission upon China. “Which could explain why they were so thorough in collecting the fragments in Pokhara,” he says. But that still does not explain the multiple sightings weeks apart in 1968.&nbsp; Indeed, US military aircraft were at that time flying frequent night-time missions from air force bases in India to supply weapons to Khampa guerrilla camps in Nepal located north of Pokhara in Mustang. It could very well be that the Chinese shot down one such aircraft. The other sightings could have been contrails of US spy planes, or Chinese anti-aircraft missiles.&nbsp; There were quite a few developments regarding UFOs in 2024. In a US congressional hearing in July, former intelligence officer David Grusch claimed that the government had long been involved in a program to investigate and retrieve non-human craft crashes, and then try to reverse engineer them. However Grusch did not show any evidence.&nbsp; The UAP Disclosure Act of 2024 was signed into law by Joe Biden in December 2023. It plans to oversee the public disclosure of UFO information. However, there is a clause in it that prevents disclosure if it would cause threats to military defense, intelligence operations or foreign relations.&nbsp; It is unlikely that the declassified documents about sightings in the Himalayan will cause any real surprise about definite evidence of alien life even if it was found. It seems humanity will continue, at least for now, to wonder about curious lights in the sky and whether there is anybody out there.&nbsp;

UFO over Pokhara

When Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) president Rabi Lamichhane was arrested in October on charges of defrauding depositors of cooperatives, the party’s vice president Swarnim Wagle gifted him Fareed Zakaria’s book, Age of Revolutions.
Since then, Lamichhane has been shunted around from Kathmandu to Pokhara to Chitwan and back to Pokhara to attend police investigations and court proceedings. He was being flown to Birganj via Kathmandu on Buddha Air on Monday. There is another pending case in Janakpur.
Human rights groups and civil society have criticised the government for hounding Lamichhane with inhumane treatment that borders on physical torture. The two parties in the coalition, Nepali Congress (NC) and the UML, see Lamichhane’s RSP as a potentially formidable challenge to their power.
Even if the fraud charges against Lamichhane are true, the Nepali public is increasingly looking at the government’s actions through the police and courts as political vendetta.
Despite all the travelling, sometimes by plane and often by road at night, Lamichhane appears to be in high spirits, waving to supporters who often gather if they know he is going to be driven around. A social media video shows him giving high fives to fellow passengers on a recent flight to Pokhara.&nbsp;
In the past weeks, streets in Pokhara have erupted with parallel protests by Lamichhane’s supporters as well as depositors of cooperatives who lost their savings to the scam.&nbsp;
Although family visits are allowed, prison officials in Pokhara told Nepali Times that not many people visit Lamichhane these days. He added, “When he does get visitors, he asks them to bring him books.”
Lamichhane is currently Nepal’s most high-profile public figure in custody, and highlights the stark difference between how influential prisoners are treated compared to ordinary inmates.
There are six prison cells at Kaski District Police Office’s two-story detention centre, three on each floor. And while authorities pack prisoners into already overcrowded cells, Lamichhane has an entire room on the second floor to himself.&nbsp;
He has also been allowed to call his family every few days. Other prisoners are not permitted phone calls except for emergencies.
Meanwhile, Lamichhane’s former business partner Chhabilal Joshi, an ex-Deputy Inspector General of Police with whom he established his Gorkha Media Network, is in custody under the same charges in the prison cell next to him.
Lamichhane is accused of siphoning off depositors' money to the tv network in which he was part-owner and anchor. &nbsp;
Both Lamichhane and Joshi are able to buy food from the police canteen instead of being served the regular meal like other prisoners. Joshi has also given his statement to authorities in Rupandehi and Kathmandu for his alleged role in the scam. Lamichhane is yet to be presented in Kathmandu for questioning.
While he was in custody at the Kathmandu District Police Complex, Joshi expressed his desire to sleep in a police officer’s office, reportedly assuring authorities that he would not run away and he was entitled to certain facilities as a former officer of the law.
“He seemed to be under the impression that he is still a police officer,” says a source at the Kathmandu District Police. “We made it clear to him that as someone accused of a crime, he was not entitled to special treatment.”
Former ministers Balkrishna Khand and Top Bahadur Rayamajhi, and ex-home secretary Tek Narayan Pandey, who were arrested in connection with the fake refugee scam last year, were similarly housed in the offices of law enforcement officials instead of prison cells. Khand has since been released after six months in jail.
While there is no legal provision to keep high-ranking officials in separate detention centres when they are arrested, authorities granting them special facilities is not uncommon. Law enforcement officials say VIP detainees expect preferential treatment while in police custody.
Among those is former Kosi Province minister Lila Ballav Adhikari, who was arrested from Biratnagar on 10 November over his alleged involvement in human trafficking and brought to Kathmandu. Adhikari had flown to Japan without government approval with three individuals on 29 October to attend a cultural conference, but had been sent back to Nepal from Narita.&nbsp;
His three companions were arrested at Kathmandu airport upon their arrival, but Adhikari was able to exit unscathed from the VIP lounge. Adhikari had resigned as the Kosi Province Minister for Internal Affairs and Law when it became public that his companions had been taken into custody, and was himself arrested shortly after. He has since been cleared by the courts.
Throughout his detention, Adhikari was kept separately from other inmates. Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Basant Rajouri, head of the Bhadrakali complex, says that while there is no separate detention area for VIPs, some detainees are kept separately depending on the nature of their crime.
However, sources say that arrangements were made for retired judges and others to visit Adhikari frequently worked at the office of a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) during his time in custody.&nbsp;
“He used to constantly pester the authorities to let him sit outside in the sun, and to be able to use the police officer’s shower area,” added an officer.
Adhikari was released on 25 November after the government prosecutor’s office decided not to charge him in a move that was seen to expose the government’s double standards.
Over at Kathmandu’s Dilli Bazar Prison, former Kist Bank CEO Kamal Gyawali emerges from his prison cell into the courtyard of the prison’s ‘Ka (क)’ block every morning with a thick book in his hands, ready to give his daily sermon.
With his long beard, Gyawali, who is serving a prison sentence for banking fraud, looks the part of a religious guru as he implores his rapt listeners to “walk the right path, abandon bad thoughts and turn to scripture and spirituality”.&nbsp;
Afterward, the attendees gather to discuss politics and current affairs. Inmates at his daily sermons at the prison include other high-profile detainees, including former MP Ichchha Raj Tamang, who is in jail for money laundering and cooperatives fraud, former joint secretary Chudamani Sharma, who was convicted of corruption, as well as NC leader Chandra Bahadur Lama and Krishna Bahadur Upreti of the UML both of whom are on trial for embezzling billions of rupees.
Victims of the cooperatives scam that former lawmaker Tamang was involved in have made trips to the prison and requested visits, but he has refused to meet with any of them.
“Tamang often complains that the state has prevented him from returning the money to the victims by locking him up,” says a police officer at the Dili Bazar jail.
“All you hear every day from the VIP prisoners is that they have been framed,” adds the officer. “No one admits that they were involved in misdeeds.”
But while most high-profile prisoners complain about prison conditions, one exception is former provincial lawmaker Deepak Manange, who is serving a sentence at Dilli Bazar Jail for attempted murder.
“He is the happiest prisoner here,” says a warden. “Unlike the others, he doesn’t claim to have been framed, in fact he doesn’t seem to care that he is in prison.”
Manange is detained in the ‘Kha (ख)’ block of the prison complex, which he renovated at his own expense. The block previously housed female prisoners, but Manange used his influence to transfer them elsewhere. He faces no shortage of visitors, who range from political leaders to people from the underworld.
Along with Manange, other well-known prisoners in this block include Nepal Telecom Managing Director Sunil Poudel, and former executive director of the Surakshan Printing Centre Bikal Poudel, who are serving time for corruption.
Former prisoners at Dilli Bazar prison include ex-ministers Khum Bahadur Khadka and Shyam Sundar Gupta, NC leader Ganesh Lama, Maoist MP Balkrishna Dhungel, Nagarik Unmukti Party leader Resham Chaudhary, as well as former IGs Ramesh Chand Thakuri, Om Bikram Rana, and Hem Bahadur Gurung.
Section 54 of Nepal’s Prison Act assigns each prison’s internal administration the
responsibility of governing its prisoners, which means the more favourable the jail management is, the more comfortable it is for prisoners.
Dilli Bazar prison has been the prison of choice for many high-ranking prisoners, especially those convicted of white collar crimes, due to its more accommodating administrators. The prison, which has the capacity to house 700 inmates, is also less crowded than other jails.
Anuj Bhattarai, spokesperson of the Department of Prison Management, says that there is no legal classification in Nepal for felons to be assigned prisons based on the nature of their crimes.
“That Dilli Bazar Jail has a higher number of prisoners convicted of crimes like corruption is most likely a coincidence,” says Bhattarai. “There is no provision for influential people to be able to choose where they will be incarcerated.”&nbsp;
Translated by Shristi Karki from the Nepali original published in himalkhabar.com

What Nepal’s VIP prisoners do in jail

If you were raised in Nepal, you must have picked up its unique set of vocabulary: आन्दोलन, चक्का जाम, बन्द, राँके जुलुस, आफ्नो मान्छे, हाम्रो दल, कर्फु and many more words connoting political protest.
We became familiar with the acrid smell of burning tyres, and eyes smarting from tear gas. And yet, everyone speaks of another revolution in the making. Not by desire, but by suffocation.
We heard speeches about नयाँ नेपाल, but the New Nepal never arrived. The governance system changed, but it did not reflect on people’s lives — except for those close to centres of power. The state is still unreachable and is not bothered about <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/matter-of-life-and-debt">victims of loan sharks</a>, cooperative scams and other injustices.
Politicians continue to speak in sound bites, but fail to deliver. They have mastered the game of pointing fingers towards an external enemy and convincing people that they are never at fault. The political narrative is so disconnected from the actual analysis of the problem that suffocation doesn’t go away after every revolution.
No genuine effort has been made to deliver at all, which is why there is a palpable sense of disillusionment in the air forcing us to seek another revolution, even if Nepal may not be able to afford it.
How has the current system successfully held power, even if the public is deeply frustrated? How is it that for three decades we continue to be led by the same faces, who have time and again, proved to us that they may be great politicians but not national leaders?
<a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/improving-internet-governance-in-nepal">My experience at the epicentre of politics</a> has led me to identify three cultures that have enabled political parties to keep a tight hold on power: acceptance, silence and dependency.
We accept things the way they are. We use fatalistic phrases like “नेपालमा यस्तै हो” or “नेपालको कानुन दैब जानुन”. While this resilience enables us to rise back up from devastating calamities, it is also a reason for our compliance with the status quo.
Despite so many ‘revolutions’ that have led to significant reforms, these phrases keep getting reinforced, to the point that the upcoming generations have made it their lingo.&nbsp;
This acceptance is not a symbol of law-abiding citizens, but citizens living in fear of those in power, unable to ask the whys and why-nots.
Innovation suffocates in this culture of acceptance of the status quo. This is manifested in remarks like “but we don’t have any laws for this,” or “we don’t have the capacity to implement this”. An innovator or entrepreneur therefore has to spend that energy to become a political lobbyist, often educating and convincing the bureaucracy.&nbsp;
Remember when locally assembled <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/banner/designed-and-made-in-nepal">Yatri motorbikes</a>, despite having willing customers, had to suffer to secure license numbers because of a lack of regulations? Instead of creating new laws, the government kept chanting the “We will promote Nepal-made goods” mantra, leaving entrepreneurs in a labyrinth of bureaucracy. The weight of acceptance of the law lies heavily on innovators. Fatalism is a tactic used by those in power to generate mass fear in society.
When we accept, we become silent. This is a pervasive phenomenon. We are trained to keep quiet, lest we ruffle feathers, burn bridges, or not get the help we need in future. We know, yet we don’t speak.
Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/bureaucratic-hurdles-in-researching-nepals-bureaucracy">Bureaucratic hurdles in researching Nepal's bureaucracy</a>, Daniel W Edwards
Here is one example: the 2021 census shows that the number of baby boys born for every 100 baby girls is 112. This is a clear indication of female foeticide because of boy preference in society.
Despite such horrifying realities, there is finger-pointing within the government between the Ministry of Health and Population with the Ministry of Home Affairs. At the citizen level, we know those who are involved in killing girls. Yet, we don’t speak up. The Nepal Medical Council reports state that despite this gender imbalance at birth, there is no indication of any action.
But why would anyone speak against one's own fraternity, no matter how vile the act is?
When we accept and keep quiet, we become dependent on those who yield power. From getting our government procedure completed on time to getting transfers, to accessing any of our legally protected rights as well, we are forced to depend on our networks of चिनेको मान्छे people we know by blood, village, relations, political affiliation.
The culture of dependency has been the established way in Nepal. If you drive a two-wheeler or four-wheeler, and you get into a small accident, you will be asked to sort it yourself, dialing up the most powerful person you know. It becomes a competition of who knows who.
Recently I was told that there were calls from the Ministry of Health and Population and another from the Prime Minister's Office for just one medical position in a private hospital. Each was pushing its own candidate. Guess which candidate got the position.&nbsp;
The dependency of people is not on the laws or the state, it is with people in power, a reliance on the network of somebody who knows somebody, including those not officially in power.
These cultures are deeply ingrained in our heads, and in society. Collectively they form a vicious circle that helps those in power to retain power. This is not the society we want to live in.
Then, what do we do as a collective to break away from this? How do we break away from the cultures of acceptance and silence that have created this dependency? What can we do to ensure that our children do not have to learn the jargon of आन्दोलन before they learn about the state?
These are the cultures political parties need to shed rather than use them to perpetuate their power. This is what <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/comment/an-alternative-to-alternative-politics-in-nepal">alternative politics</a> needs to be about.
Sumana Shrestha is a member of Parliament’s Education, Health and Information Technology parliamentary committee and represents the Rastriya Swatantara Party.

supreme-court