Submit your Article

I hate it when things slip apart, 

When pieces fall from a fragile heart. 

I hate losing what I love the most, 

And fear turns me into a silent ghost. 

I overthink, but not too long, 

Fear makes my feelings feel so wrong. 

So I push away the ones I need, 

Craving space, but planting seeds, 

Of distance, silence hurt, not said, 

Ignoring what I need instead. 

I miss chances made for me, 

Let them pass, too blind to see. 

This habit grows, day by day, 

And I lose myself along the way. 

It’s hard to move, to start again, 

Hard to breathe through quiet pain. 

When things go wrong, I lose my light, 

I dim myself to make things right. 

I ignore the pull of what is true, 

Because at that point.. 

I disappear too. 

Supriya Paudel 

United College, Lalitpur

Art is far too often minimized in Nepal to its post-exam positioning: a recreational hobby, something to be done only if time permits. Art is not something to be done ‘if’ and ‘when’. It’s a way of expressing oneself, resisting, and staying alive. And it’s high time that we start treating it as such.

Nepali artists work without institutional support, earning second and third jobs simply to stay afloat. There are few grants, little visibility, and even less recognition for individuals opting to follow creative careers. This mindset is carried over to children, too. Parents disapprove of sketching, music, or dance the moment examinations come around, calling it ‘distraction’. Schools don’t offer any budget for arts. And society recognizes artists as failures unless they ‘make it big’.

But take a look around you. Everything like advertisement, festivals, architecture, protest rallies, fashion, film, etc. depends on art. It is not just about aesthetics; art influences perspectives; how we see the world and how the world sees us. It builds identity, safeguards cultural memory, and fuels local and global economies. Whether it is ancient paubha paintings from the Kathmandu Valley or a product label from a corner shop, there is no escape from art, a silent force that stitches together value and connection.

Despite its presence, art in Nepal is still treated as luxury, something to appreciate and admire, but it does not demand respect. Students interested in a creative future are told not to pursue art because it is ‘not a real career’. Parents are concerned it won’t lead to a living. Schools undervalue art programs. Art is only celebrated after the artist has fame and never during the journey to find it.

If Nepal is serious about nurturing imagination, safeguarding its diversely rich heritage, and creating jobs in the creative industries of the 21st century, we must stop disparaging art, and treat it like the fundamental thing that it is. We should encourage it in our schools, support it in our communities, and honor it in our discussions. We need to prepare teachers to set ideas free and embrace creativity as a skill rather than a hobby. We need to create public spaces for young people to create, express, and share their art without the fear of being criticized or written off.

Art is not a pastime, it is a pathway, a potent pathway that we should walk proudly, supportively, and purposefully.

Amy Thapa

St Xavier’s College, Maitighar

The history of higher education in Nepal began with Transnational Education. Tri-Chandra Campus, established with the aim of providing higher education, commenced its academic journey in 1918 under the affiliation of Patna University, India. Thus, foreign universities were already present in Nepal 41 years before the establishment of the country’s oldest university, Tribhuvan University. In this regard, Tri-Chandra was not only Nepal’s first college but also the first institution to offer foreign university degrees. Following its example, several other institutions such as Padma Kanya Campus, Patan Campus, Nepal Law Campus, Morang Campus, and Mahendra Ratna Campus operated under affiliation with Patna University.

To properly manage institutions affiliated with foreign universities, the government introduced the Directive for Operating Higher Education Under Foreign Institutional Affiliation, 2059. To make this directive more contextual and effective, task forces were formed in 2018 and 2020 to submit updated reports.

29,500 students currently enrolled

According to the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 88 colleges and educational institutions in Nepal are currently operating academic programs under the affiliation of foreign universities. Among them, 59 institutions offer undergraduate and postgraduate programs, others provide A-Level and equivalent courses. Data from the International Education Providers Association Nepal (IEPAN) reveals that 29,500 students are currently enrolled in these institutions, making them the third-largest after Tribhuvan University and Pokhara University. These institutions have increasingly focused on market-demanded subjects such as Information Technology, Cybersecurity, Management, Animation, and Hospitality making them popular among students.

University rankings

Nepal’s regulations state that partner universities should ideally be ranked within the top 1000 in globally recognized rankings such as Times Higher Education and Shanghai Jiao Tong. Nepal has two universities featured in the 2025 Times Higher Education World University Rankings: Kathmandu University and Tribhuvan University, both ranked in the 1,500+ category. However, 33 of the foreign-affiliated universities in Nepal fall outside these global rankings. Clause 2 of the directive allows a loophole: if a university is not ranked but maintains quality, it can still be accepted based on submitted evidence. This has led to an influx of low-ranked or unranked universities without mandatory quality assessment, signaling a need for stronger regulatory action. Despite amendments to the directive, gaps still exist. Some institutions have been found to offer misleading information during admissions, provide degrees from different universities than advertised, operate without proper affiliation, and employ underqualified faculty. Such practices compromise consistency in teaching methods and educational quality.

Study in Nepal

Currently, around 12 percent of students at Kathmandu University are international. As the Nepalese government envisions making Nepal an educational hub, institutions offering foreign degrees within Nepal must not be overlooked. During the past 29 years, Nepal’s private sector has been instrumental in developing higher education through partnerships with international providers. While Transnational Education has had a positive impact on Nepal’s education sector, it has yet to mature sufficiently to address broader socio-economic disparities—differences in educational access between urban and rural areas, and persistent gender-based inequalities that still remain. Improving academic quality is essential for Nepal to become a preferred destination for international students. As countries like Australia, the UK, and Canada face economic challenges and ease student visa processes, Nepal has the opportunity to offer a more stable long-term study environment.

The urge to go abroad

According to recent statistics from the Foreign Study Permit Branch in Sanothimi, 464,777 students have obtained permission to study abroad over the past six years (since 2018/19). Nepal Rastra Bank reports that this outflow of students has led to a capital flight of Rs 382.11bn. The branch notes that the number of students applying for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) is rising, with around 600 applications submitted daily. On average, each student spends about Rs 1.3m for foreign studies. In just the first 11 months of 2023/24, students going abroad spent Rs 117.58bn.

While billions are leaving the country, aggressive marketing campaigns by colleges offering undergraduate programs are underway in Nepal, especially with the recent announcement of Class 12 examination results. Foreign-affiliated colleges are introducing new programs, increasing confusion among students. Some institutions have even been operating A-Level, International Baccalaureate (IB), CBSE, and similar programs without government authorization. The Ministry issued a notice cautioning parents against enrolling their children in such institutions and warned of legal actions—though no substantial action has been taken so far, leading to a decline in public trust.

Opportunities within Nepal

According to the 2024 report by the expert committee formed to study foreign-affiliated institutions, these colleges have played a role in curbing student outmigration. By offering foreign degrees within Nepal, an estimated Rs 60bn has been saved from leaving the country. More than 7,500 students have received full or partial scholarships, and over 7,000 individuals have been directly employed, with another 15,000 benefiting indirectly.

Education budget

Despite repeated commitments from political parties and successive governments, the education sector has received only 10.75 percent of the total national budget. Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel allocated Rs 211.17bn to the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology for the current fiscal year, which is a 0.2 percent decrease from the previous year’s budget of Rs 266bn. This indicates the need for qualitative improvement in education. If the government cannot significantly increase investment, it should provide more opportunities to the private sector while strictly enforcing standards and regulations.

Provisions in other countries

In India, foreign universities are allowed to establish local campuses. In May of 2025, the University Grants Commission of India granted permission to five foreign universities to open campuses in the country, in alignment with the new 2023 regulations and the National Education Policy 2020. These universities have already submitted letters of intent and aim to begin student admissions by Dec 2026. So far, nine foreign universities have registered with the Indian UGC, and three of them have already established campuses. This initiative aims to provide access to high-quality global education within India, save on foreign education expenses, and promote an international academic environment locally.

Similarly, Sri Lanka currently hosts 66 colleges affiliated with UK and Australian universities. In Bangladesh, several colleges operate in partnership with universities from the UK, Australia, and Malaysia. However, Pakistan and the Maldives have not actively promoted Transnational Education (TNE).

The author is teacher at The Westminster College

Land is more than a physical resource—it represents the foundation of culture, livelihoods and dignity in Nepal. However, centuries of discriminatory policies have systematically stripped communities like the Tharu, Limbu, and Chepang of their ancestral lands, consequently deepening poverty, exacerbating ethnic tensions, and causing extensive environmental harm.

The 2015 Constitution offers hope: Article 37 ensures every citizen’s ‘right to appropriate housing’ and protection from unlawful evictions, while Article 51(e) calls for scientific land reforms to eliminate ‘dual ownership’, curb ‘absentee land ownership’, and manage land for productivity, ecological balance, and farmers’ access to resources. Yet the crisis remains staggering—the Land Issue Resolving Commission reports roughly 89,144 landless Dalit families, 168,888 other landless families, and 875,164 unmanaged settler families, potentially affecting 1.5m families or 6m people. The High-Level Land Reform Commission (2065) estimates 5.5m landless people, with women owning merely 16 percent of land and Dalits controlling only one percent of agricultural land.

A controversial law

Despite these constitutional mandates, Nepal’s government has tabled a Bill to Amend Some Nepal Acts Related to Land, closely mirroring a previously withdrawn ordinance. Although claiming to address longstanding governance issues, it has generated intense controversy due to concerns that it may facilitate elite capture, enable exploitation by land brokers, benefit real estate businesses, and cause significant environmental damage—including deforestation in the Chure region and misuse of forests, public lands and national parks.

The High-Level Land Reform Commissions, established at various periods in Nepal’s history, have consistently warned against ‘cosmetic’ reforms that fail to tackle semi-feudal structures. Instead, they advocate comprehensive changes to prioritize marginalized groups and protect ecosystems. Through historical institutionalism and political ecology frameworks, this analysis explores the urgent need for equitable reforms aligned with constitutional mandates and Supreme Court rulings.

Historical roots of land injustice

Nepal’s land problems originated centuries ago with policies systematically favoring high-caste elites over indigenous groups, dismantling communal systems that sustained communities. Cox (1990) demonstrates how the 1768 Gorkha conquest centralized land control and disrupted the Limbu’s ‘Kipat’ system—a communal tenure where land was collectively owned and could not be sold, preserving cultural identity and economic stability.

Historical institutionalism reveals how these policies are permanently locked in inequalities. The 1886 ‘male tenure’ policy allowed cultivators, predominantly Brahmans, to claim ‘Kipat’ lands through ‘subinfeudation’—dividing and transferring rights—turning indigenous Limbus into tenants on their ancestral territory. The 1964 ‘Land Reform Act’, while aimed at redistribution, was undermined by loopholes allowing elites to retain control, fueling ethnic tensions. The 1968 ‘Kipat abolition’ completely stripped groups like the Limbu and Chepang of their foundations.

This pattern repeated throughout Nepal. The Chepang’s ‘Kipat’ lands, granted in 1848, became ‘Raikar’—state-owned, taxable land—by 1854, pushing communities into poverty. In Dang valley, the Tharu’s Barghar system, a sophisticated communal model for equitable land use, collapsed after 1950s malaria eradication allowed Hindu settlers to seize prime lands, displacing 3,000 Tharus by 1980. The Limbu’s ‘Satya Hangama’ movement, seeking ‘Kipat’ restoration, was crushed by 1946, reflecting ‘legal pluralism’—the clash between customary and state laws.

According to the HLLRC (2065) report, today’s reality starkly reflects these injustices: 47 percent of small farmers control merely 15 percent of land, while three percent of large farmers hold 17 percent, and 20 percent of fertile land lies unused due to speculative holding by bureaucrats and brokers. Semi-feudal practices persist—dual ownership, absenteeism, and bonded labor systems like Haliya, Kamaiya, Haruwa, Charuwa, Kamalari and Gothala encompass approximately one million agricultural laborers. Women, despite working 18 hours daily, hold only 16 percent of land ownership. Indigenous peoples, one-third of the population, face systematic encroachment. Around 1.02m families (5.5m people) remain landless, forcing migration to India and abroad.

Global lessons

Nepal’s challenges mirror global land inequities. Westwood (1984) shows how the US South’s failed “land redistribution’—General Sherman’s 1865 promise of ‘forty acres and a mule’ to freed slaves—was reversed by political forces restoring elite control. Gates (1976) demonstrates how the 1862 ‘Homestead Act’ favored speculators over genuine settlers while displacing Native Americans. In Muscovy, ‘absentee land management’ triggered ‘peasant revolts’ (Melton, 1978).

Spence (1985) defines ‘landlessness’ as systematic exclusion creating ‘dead capital’—land unusable for loans or investment due to insecure tenure. Political ecology frameworks highlight how power imbalances enable elite capture, echoing Nepal’s current Bill concerns. Smith (2018) notes ‘global land use’ tensions harm marginalized groups, while Hrabovszky (1987) warns ‘land use pressure’ risks deforestation.

A fundamental right

Land represents a fundamental human right central to dignity and survival. Enemark et al. (2014) connect ‘land administration’—managing ownership, value, and use—to Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Article 17 (property) and Article 25 (living standards). ‘Tenure security’ aligns with Article 37 of Nepal’s Constitution. The ‘Social Tenure Domain Model’ recognizes a ‘continuum of land rights’, protecting informal tenure, though facing elite capture risks.

Nepal’s crisis produces profound impacts. Economically, losing ‘Kipat’ and Barghar lands drives poverty and migration through ‘dead capital’. Culturally, these losses sever indigenous traditions. Politically, suppressed movements like ‘Satya Hangama’ mirror global exclusion patterns. Environmentally, ‘land use pressure’ creates risks like Chure deforestation. Socially, bonded labor and inequalities persist with women and Dalits systematically marginalized.

Beyond cosmetic changes

The proposed bill must adopt the HLLRC’s structural reforms rather than perpetuating elite capture. Genuine transformation requires ending ‘dual ownership’ and ‘absentee land ownership’, redistributing land to tillers, and prioritizing Dalits, women and indigenous groups. Land classification must scientifically separate agricultural and non-agricultural uses. Agricultural land should be classified by production zones—grain, fruit, vegetable, cash crops, medicinal herbs, grazing, tea, coffee, cardamong, sugarcane, jute and special zones. Non-agricultural land needs residential, industrial and environmental protection designations. Special measures for fragile ecological zones like Chure and Mahabharat are essential.

Clear policies on priority rights and compensation are critical. As the HLLRC states, “Competition essential for capitalist development must be among equals.” Reforms must promote cooperatives, overhaul corrupt administration, and implement collaborative governance with monitoring to prevent land grabs while ensuring constitutional compliance.

A vision for lasting justice

Nepal’s 1.5m landless families face a pivotal moment. The proposed Bill must move beyond ‘cosmetic’ reforms by implementing the HLLRC’s blueprint to dismantle semi-feudal systems, restore ‘customary tenure’ like Barghar and Kipat systems, and protect ecosystems like Chure and Mahabharat. By aligning with constitutional mandates and Supreme Court rulings, Nepal can ensure equitable land access, empower marginalized groups, and boost agricultural productivity through cooperatives and modern methods.

Learning from global failures and local traditions, Nepal can establish a new standard for land justice, ensuring no community remains landless or voiceless. The choice is clear: continue cosmetic fixes preserving centuries of injustice, or embrace transformative reforms that Nepal’s Constitution demands and marginalized communities deserve.