Submit your Article

The much-awaited XPulse will be avail­able in NADA in two variants—an adven­ture-focused XPulse 200 and a touring-fo­cused XPulse 200T. The XPulse 200 and the XPulse 200T are powered by the same 199.6cc, single-cylinder, air-cooled engine from the Xtreme 200R, but Hero will likely tune the engine differently on the XPulse variants. The XPulse 200 and XPulse 200T will both feature single-channel ABS, LED lighting at both ends, a digital instrument cluster with Bluetooth connectivity and navigation, and a windscreen for better wind protection.

Speaking of the XPulse 200, the motor­cycle gets a long-travel suspension and larger spoked wheels (21-inch up front and 18-inch at the rear) wrapped in knobby wire-spoked tires. It makes use of a box-section swingarm and a mono­shock rear suspension at the rear, and telescopic forks at the front. The front forks have 190mm travel while the gas-charged monoshock at the rear has 170mm travel. It also features a luggage rack, knuckle guards, a high-mounted exhaust for better water-wading capability, and a sump guard.

On the other hand, the XPulse 200T is the touring version of the XPulse 200 and gets revised ergonomics, a lower ground clearance of 30mm than the XPulse 200, taller gearing, and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with a 100/80-sec­tion tire at the front and a 130/70-section tire at the rear.

Ayurveda is really a way of life that keeps you fit and healthy through your adherence to natural rhythms and cycles. It employs a variety of natu­ral elements to bring harmony to the physiology. The Ayurveda Home brings to you an herbal oil massage, which will refresh your body after a weary travel. The package consists of a Shi­rodhara session with warm herbal oils and pick and drop services. This 90-minute session will cost you Rs 11,500. For further details contact +97761463205.

One of the most mesmerizing rituals at Pashupat­inath Temple is the Pashupati Bagmati Aarati. The priests perform the aarati through circular motions of oil lamps and dedicating their act to the divine. Devotees sing Bhajans (songs with reli­gious themes) during the aarati, creating a blissful surrounding. The aarati starts at 6 pm every eve­ning. This is a ritual that allows everyone to take part and creates a kind of unity between the gods and their devotees.

Thursday, August 22: The Cab­inet amends rules allowing the prime minister to call cabinet meetings from abroad through a video conference.

Friday, August 23: The Supreme Court asks the federal government to come up with reasons behind the formulation of laws to provide monthly sal­ary to all local level represen­tatives.

Saturday, August 24: Minis­ter of Labor, Employment and Social Security Gokarna Bista talks of how the implementation of the landmark social security scheme has hit roadblocks due to a lack of cooperation from industrialists.

Sunday, August 25: Minister of Information and Communica­tion Technology Gokul Banskota assures his countrymen that the republican system is safe and secure.

Monday, August 26: The Supreme Court issues a verdict in Ncell’s favor in a case filed by the private telecom giant against the Large Taxpayers’ Office. Ncell was challenging the payment of Rs 62.63 bil­lion in capital gain tax on its buyout deal.

Nepal Communist Party bars its cadres from criticizing its leaders, and for the first time in the country’s history its cabi­net meeting was held through a video conference.

Tuesday, August 27: Chief Ministers of seven provinces express dissatisfaction over the tourism ministry’s preparations for Visit Nepal Year 2020.

Wednesday, August 28: Nepal Army says it will complete the Kathmandu-Nijgadh fast-track within the next three and a half years.

Thursday, August 29: The government tables the contro­versial Media Council Bill in the National Assembly. Ruling Nepal Communist Party has pledged to amend its contro­versial provisions as per the agreement with the Federation of Nepali Journalists.

Nepal Airlines’ A330 wide-body completes its maiden flight to Osaka, Japan. The airlines will fly to Osaka three times a week

 Public dissatisfaction with the government seems to be grow­ing, as has been expressed in pro­tests over multiple issues. How do you see this phenomenon?

This is not something that hap­pens overnight. First, the country has never had a government that people fully owned. For the Ranas, family was the priority. The brief democratic period between 1950 and 1960 was soon undone in a coup. The Panchayat regime was only for royalists and a small coterie. Those who opposed the regime were portrayed as anti-national forces, so it was not a government of all. After the political change in 1990, people had expected such tendencies to end. But the governments formed after 1990 were those of political parties and not everybody felt own­ership. In recent days, governments have come to be confined to factions within parties. Till date, this nation has not had a government of Nepal.

There are quick political changes because people have certain expec­tations. If those expectations are not met, they support various polit­ical movements and the changes that those movements bring about. The goal is to end past bad prac­tices and start good governance. But subsequent political develop­ments could meet people’s expec­tations. Our transitional period was prolonged, and anarchism, indis­cipline, and widespread impunity took root. People tolerated those things during the transition. But when elections took place, Nepali people acted smart. They aspired for a strong government and gave an overwhelming mandate to a party. There were expectations that the strong government could take any decision in favor of the country and all its citizens, even by taking risks.

The barriers to development have been identified. Everybody knows the problems in the functioning of parties. There were expectations that the government would address those issues in its five year tenure, that it would build necessary insti­tutions, replace obsolete ones, and create an environment for good gov­ernance. In the initial days, the gov­ernment instilled some hope, such as by getting rid of syndicates in the transport sector. People supported the government in this. But public trust gradually eroded. On the one hand we have a habit of seeking immediate changes. On the other, the functioning of the government created frustrations.

The level of frustration is high even among party cadres. In this scenario, if someone tries to do a small thing, people support it. The case of Rabi Lamichhane is a case in point. He raised some governance issues and people supported him. In a nutshell, despite the change in system, the characters remained the same and there was no change in their working style. All these things have contributed to public dissatis­faction.

What do you think forces people to abandon personal comforts and come out on the streets?

There are multiple factors. The first is related to our political affil­iation. We are blind supporters of political parties and we are paying a price. Second, it is about caus­es. If someone comes up with a new cause, people support them, hoping they would bring about a transformation. Third, there is dis­satisfaction due to bad governance, and if someone shows something positive, the masses follow. Another fundamental issue is that all Nepalis are yet to own this country fully. So if someone sees some opportunity they join a protest to express dis­content. The groups that were mar­ginalized yesterday have their own beliefs and values. There also are forces that have raised arms against the current system. When they get a chance, those forces come togeth­er. Plus, cadres of political parties whose duty is to create a positive environment remain silent and they are also likely to join those outside forces to vent their frustrations.

Don’t the protests in the case of Nirmala Panta and Rabi Lamich­hane suggest people do not trust the police and the judiciary?

The central issue is the erosion of politics. Now there is a big question mark on the integrity of institutions such as the judiciary, parliament, constitutional bodies and security agencies. People doubt the system can work independently. The inci­dents you point out are related to trust in institutions. People do not believe that the system works prop­erly. They think the system may do wrong and they should exert pres­sure on these institutions. There is political intervention at all levels so there is no firm belief in institutions.

How do you see the unfolding of the case involving Rabi Lamich­hane on social media?

Technology is both a blessing and a curse. It is contributing to social awareness. Due to social media, even people from far-flung areas are politically empowered. On the negative side, various studies have shown that around 70 percent people who have smartphones use social media, and 60 percent of those users believe what appears on social media. Users have failed to understand the basics of social media. We do not have sufficient capacity to revisit the content on social media. Similarly, there is a tendency on social media that we are free to do anything we want. There is some anarchy. Now, our challenge at this point is to edu­cate people about the use of social media.

Do you advocate imposing cen­sorship on social media to make it more disciplined?

Instead of censorship, we should focus on the best use of social media. Compared to other countries, we are still liberal when it comes to our social media rights but we also have to think about controlling the anarchy therein. We should retain the positive aspects of social media while discouraging fake and mali­cious content.

Is there a successful model of social media regulation abroad which can be replicated in Nepal?

In advanced countries, measures are being taken to make platforms accountable. If there are some objectionable contents, Facebook and Twitter are made accountable instead of punishing users who post such contents. There are measures like redirecting, deleting and sus­pending those contents. In third-world countries, we cannot enforce such measures. Even if Facebook is banned in Nepal, there will be no big impact on its revenue but if it is banned in America and other devel­oped countries, its revenue will be hit badly. But there are other ways to make social media accountable. In Nepal, there is a tendency of attacking individual users. We need to educate the people. Digital litera­cy should be our priority.

There are new attempts to con­trol the media and other state organs. Many reckon the commu­nist government is out to impose a totalitarian system.

In my understanding, the current government is not communist. They claim to be communists to lure vot­ers but in practice, they are not. But there is a big segment in the country that cannot easily digest communism. In the constitution, we have mentioned socialism but it has not been properly defined. There is a government with a two-third majority which is capable of amend­ing the charter, and there is a fear this government could turn author­itarian. Next, there is a problem in its working style. There should be sufficient consultations with stake­holders before introducing import­ant measures. The process is not consultative and transparent. Third, the way our ministers disseminate their message is problematic. There is little transparency and communi­cation is faulty.

You’ve said there is a political upheaval in Nepal every 10 years or so. Do you see any possibili­ty of a complete reversal of the current political system anytime soon?

I am studying the basic character of this country and mentality of Nepali people. As public expecta­tions have not been met, frustration has grown. I do not see the possi­bility of immediate change but we cannot rule out such circumstances in some years.

In the nation-building process, we constituted a Constituent Assembly. In the initial phase of constitution drafting, we adopted a participato­ry process. But when we collected people’s feedback, we did not pay heed to them. During constitution drafting, there was no clause-wise discussion as mentioned in the CA procedures, and cross-party law­makers were forced to withdraw their amendment bills.

They were not given time to speak. A few leaders dictated the process and took decisions and now we are witnessing the consequences. Due to the flawed process, dissatisfaction of people continues to increase. A section of the population was of the view that there should be a ref­erendum on monarchy. That view was given short shrift. The rights of the monarchy were stripped before the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly. If the current political leadership realizes that there has been a mistake and commits not to repeat them, people will still give it time to do good. But first the leader­ship has to accept its mistakes.

The government has a five-year mandate but it is limiting dem­ocratic space through new leg­islations.

Our fundamental character is that people stick to their party during elections even if they are not sat­isfied with the party. The swing population is small. Our future will depend on whether there will be a sizable swing population. Four par­ties hold majority votes. Also, there is democracy in our blood. People do not easily tolerate attempts to curtail democratic rights. However, the decay of the four major parties is rapid. They are being alienated from the society and dissatisfaction is rising. There are indications that parties may not be able to retain their votes. I am still not clear who will benefit from the degeneration of these political parties.

Lastly, how do you see the func­tioning of the parliament in Nepal?

The problem right now is we made political parties very powerful, and so we suffer. In our context, political parties became strong everywhere, damaging the system. The parlia­ment is mandated to make all state machinery accountable but in our case the parliament remains the weakest of the three state organs. We have to revisit certain things to make the parliament strong. The parliament should be a center of excellence. First, our lawmakers, instead of being nationally-minded, are constituency-specific. They have a mentality of winning elections at any cost. Lawmakers struggle to be ministers to develop their constitu­ency. See what the prime minister is doing in Damak, Jhapa. So, we have to revisit the current electoral system. The election has become costly and genuine politicians can­not fight them. Elections are in the hands of criminals as they have all the money.

Power is concentrated in the hands of non-state actors. We exer­cise our sovereign rights through our lawmakers but the sovereign powers of the parliament are being exercised by the leaders of four or five parties. Whatever leaders say goes; the voices in the parliament are not heard. The current whip system in the parliament should be revisited. Except when a no-confi­dence motion is registered against the PM, there should be no whip. That would allow the parliament to function independently. Another major factor is that ministers are selected from the parliament. Law­makers run after leaders seeking ministerial positions. This means lawmakers are losing their author­ity. Therefore, lawmakers should perform legislative work and make government accountable. Their focus should be on how to make the best legislation. Ministers should be selected from among technocrats who have knowledge of their field and who can govern on the basis of their expertise. 

With contemporary SUV design proportions, the Harrier sports a roof with bold chrome finisher, flared wheel arches, and dual function LED DRLs accentuating its overall bold pres­ence. The interior is clean, clutter-free, and offers a balance of style and practicality. The use of high-quality materials and color com­binations enhances the experience, lending a premium and luxurious feel.

The H5 is powered by the Kryotec 2.0 Diesel engine, which delivers 138 Bhp of power and 350 Nm of torque with an Advanced Electron­ically Controlled Variable Geometry Turbo­charger (eVGT) for excellent low-end torque and linear power delivery. It is mated to a 6-speed manual transmission. The H5 also gets three Engine Drive Modes (Eco, City, Sport) which is married to the ESP Terrain Response Modes (Normal, Rough, Wet) to ensure smooth han­dling over every kind of terrain, and with the steering tuned for excellent driving dynamics. The front suspension and hydra bush have been carried over from the D8 Platform while the rear twist blade suspension has been specially designed by Lotus Engineering UK.

The major highlights for Suzuki cars at this year’s NADA Auto Show will be the S-Cross Smart Hybrid, Ciaz Smart Hybrid, and the Ertiga Smart Hybrid.

Ciaz Smart Hybrid

The Ciaz smart hybrid boasts of a wide range of changes to the exterior, inte­rior, and engine options. The big­gest upgrade is the new 1.5-liter K15 petrol engine, along with the introduction of a smart hybrid system with a Lithium-ion bat­tery. The Suzuki Ciaz facelift churns out 103 hp at 6,000 rpm, which is up by 13 per­cent and the torque has been improved by 6 percent at 138 Nm at 4400 rpm. Suzuki says the hybrid tech will also help it deliver a better fuel efficiency.

S-Cross Smart Hybrid

While the first S-Cross didn’t exactly fly out of the showrooms, Suzuki hopes to change that with the new S-Cross. Suzuki has now revised the S-Cross’ looks, upgraded the fea­ture-list and plans to only offer the 1.3-litre diesel engine that makes 89bhp and 200Nm of torque, and is coupled to a five-speed manual trans­mission. Suzuki has now incorporated ‘Smart Hybrid’ technology which features idle start-stop system, brake energy regeneration (to assist engine power on acceleration), and a gear shift indicator.

Ertiga Smart Hybrid

The facelifted Ertiga comes with sever­al new features and exterior & interior updates. The diesel version of the new Suzuki Ertiga, additionally, gets SHVS (Smart Hybrid Vehicle by Suzuki) micro-hybrid system that is avail­able on the Ciaz and the S-Cross. With the help of SHVS technology, the new Ertiga diesel is claimed to return an improved mileage of 24.52km/l (up 18 percent).

There is an evolving global debate on the relation between technology and democracy: Have modern technology and its products strengthened democracy or have they weakened it? The jury is still out. Yet the deleterious consequences of the wrong use of technology on democracy can no longer be ignored. At its worst, technology can bitterly divide society and boost undemocratic actors. A good example of the divisive tendency of modern technology is social media. Consider the ongoing legal case of media personality Rabi Lamichhane. His supporters were quick to leap to his defense on Facebook. His critics were as ardent in trying to establish his association with a suicide. The two sides quarreled endlessly. Yet they had one troubling thing in common: neither side trusted state institutions to settle the case fairly.

In the same week, Prime Minister KP Oli conducted a cabinet meeting via a videoconference from Singapore. Nothing wrong with an innovative use of technology in governance. But the videoconference, it turns out, was held over an insecure internet line. A skilled hacker could have listened in to the confidential stuff that were discussed, compromising national interest.

It has now been established that Russian hackers had some (if not a decisive) role in the victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election. This shows that even the best of online firewalls can be breached. With more and more of our own electoral records being digitized, there is a legitimate fear that they too could be tampered with. Nepali hackers have already shown their prowess in tampering with the websites of our prominent state institutions. The rise of the deep web—a market for everything from illicit drugs to contract killers—poses another problem. The traffic to the deep web has supposedly increased following the government’s porn ban last year.

There is no going back on technology. But there must also be more education on its right use, perhaps starting with greater awareness on the use of social media. It is about time Nepali schools started relevant courses on online misinformation and hate speech. The state must also invest more in protecting sensitive digital information, be the records of bank clients or taxpayers.

Internet and technology have played a crucial role in democratizing access to information and modern-day comforts. But used the wrong way, they can as easily destroy democratic norms and values.

 Is it at all possible to revive the monarchy? Or the Hindu state? It’s incredible how these questions are being raised less than four years after the promulgation of the post-monarchial constitution of the new federal republic—a constitution that specifically designates Nepal a secular state. Despite all the conspiracy theories doing the rounds, it is hard to see how the monarchy, much reviled in its current avatar, can make a comeback. Besides the adverse public opinion, the political equations are not in its favor either; the parties still pitching for monarchy are miniscule, almost inconsequential forces.

There seems to be a greater constituency in favor of restoring the Hindu state, who are buoyed by the resounding reelection of the Hindu-nationalist BJP in India. Both domestic and international climates are ripe for the restoration of the Hindu state, its advocates say. Whether or not that is the case, there are many other reasons not to go down this perilous path. A modern nation-state is by nature secular, equally respectful of people of all faiths. With over 80 percent of its population comprised of Hindus, Nepal is already a de facto Hindu state. Nothing can change that. Making it a de jure Hindu state will be an exercise in futility, with no plausible benefits.

Why try fixing something that is not broken and invite unforeseeable troubles? Shouldn’t the energies of our political class be rather spent on making the new federal system tick and guiding the country on the path of peace and prosperity? We have already seen the grave consequences of the divisive nationalism based on religion and ethnicity championed by the likes of Trump, Modi and Erdogan. This is turn has resulted in the breakdown of social norms and decency and the steady erosion of democratic freedoms in these societies. The Nepali state taking up the cudgels on behalf of one particular religion will be similarly destabilizing.

Nepal is home to Hindus and Buddhists and Christians and Muslims and people of many other faiths. Except some sporadic troubles, they have mostly lived in harmony since millennia. Why do something that has even a small chance of disturbing that harmony? Having recently drafted a fairly progressive constitution, Nepali political class should be extremely wary of turning the clock back. Not least because it could be a slippery slope to the reversal of all post-2006 gains.