Submit your Article

Rahul Barua is the Secretary General of the South Asia Foundation. He holds a B.Tech in Chemical Engineering from the Institute of Technology, Banaras Hindu University (now IIT-BHU), and currently serves as a Visiting Faculty at Malaviya Peace Research Centre, Banaras Hindu University. In 1997, he established the first-ever crafts development center in Sikkim, introducing microcredit and self-help groups in the region. 

He also developed a potter’s village on the outskirts of New Delhi, named Kumhargram. Additionally, he founded the South Asia Centre for Peace Research and Sustainable Development in collaboration with Lumbini Buddhist University. Baruwa has played a significant role in peace-building efforts in Nepal, facilitating meetings between Nepali and Indian political parties.  He worked alongside prominent figures such as Sitaram Yechury and Dr DP Tripathi as well as Nepali leaders like Pradeep Giri, Girija Prasad Koirala, Krishna Prasad Mahara, Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Madhav Kumar Nepal, among others. ApEx talked to him on wide-range of issues related to Nepal-India relations. Excerpts: 

What is the South Asia Foundation? Please tell us about its activities.

The South Asia Foundation is a Nepal-registered organization. In collaboration with the Lumbini Buddhist University, we established the South Asia Centre for Peace Research and Sustainable Development. A few years ago, around 5,000 people visited the Maya Devi Temple — a sacred site for followers of Buddha’s teachings — daily. Today, the number has risen to 7,000, with an additional 15,000 visiting Lumbini. Gautam Buddha is not just a figure for Nepal or India, he is a South Asian face for global peace and humanity. His teachings — tolerance, peaceful co-existence, compassion and moving away from materialism — are more relevant than ever in today’s conflict-ridden world. 

This center was conceptualized years ago, and it is very encouraging that Lumbini Buddhist University has provided it with land and necessary infrastructure.  The center not only disseminates knowledge about Buddha but also offers academic diploma courses designed in collaboration with the university. Many top universities of India and South Asian, along with experts, academicians and retired government officials are eager to engage with the center to share their knowledge and expertise with students.

We aim to facilitate Memorandum of Understanding (MoUs) with Lumbini Buddhist University and other universities all over the world. We are in negotiations with the best universities of the South Asian countries. Best minds have come forward and we are collaborating in multiple forms. Several MoUs have already been signed.

What are the other areas that the Foundation and the Center are working on?

We are working on several bilateral issues such as water sharing and border management among others. In 2017, former Indian Ambassador to Nepal, Manjeev Singh Puri, highlighted how Nepali living in India are contributing significantly to the Indian economy. Gone are the days when Nepalis were limited to roles like security guards or menial jobs. Today, they are entrepreneurs running restaurants, manpower agencies and online service providers. 

One area of focus is Nepal’s potential to supply dairy products, especially ghee, to South Asia. Milk production is falling in Bangladesh, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, as well as in the Nepal-India border regions. Nepal can fill this gap by supplying dairy products not only to India but also to other South Asian countries. There should be duty-free agreement on these items between Nepal and India. The Foundation operates without foreign funding, relying entirely on internal resources.  We are training Nepali women to become entrepreneurs and have partnered with India’s dairy giant Amul to make the dairy sector organized. There are many areas where we can work together.

Can you please tell us about the light and sound program being launched in Lumbini?

We have signed a MoU for this project and are raising funds locally. Several banks have agreed to support us, though they have their own terms and conditions as per the law and banking regulations. This light and sound program is the first of this kind in Nepal and one of the few in the world dedicated to narrating the story of Lord Buddha. Our goal is to spread the message of peace, compassion and Buddha’s teachings which are relevant even today. We are doing a lot of work on DPR and research from our own funds.  We are receiving technical assistance from a British company. The idea for this light and sound program was proposed to me by Sujeet Shakya of Kathmandu Guest House.

Last week, you organized an important seminar in New Delhi. What were the key outcomes?

The seminar was organized to facilitate knowledge-sharing between Lumbini Buddhist University and other universities in India.  Renowned professors, academics and historians participated in the seminar and shared their insights. They also pledged to support our initiatives. 

Five universities and two institutions have agreed to collaborate with the Lumbini Buddhist University and the Center on joint research, student and faculty exchange programs, seminars, conferences and academic partnerships. We also held sideline meetings with Nepali political leaders and other stakeholders. 

Many more universities have expressed interest in supporting Lumbini Buddhist University. During the seminar, Nepali delegates also engaged with Indian leaders and diplomats, discussing Nepal’s ongoing development and its emergence as a dynamic nation. Over the past two decades, not only has India undergone rapid changes, but Nepal has also transformed significantly.  These changes need to be acknowledged, understood and embraced.

How do you assess the current state of Nepal-India relations?

Nepal and India are both sovereign countries and must mutually respect each other. Both sides share the responsibility to strengthen this relationship. The two countries are equals, each holding their own vote in the United Nations and other multilateral organizations. There is no thing as a ‘big’ or ‘small’ country. Mutual respect is essential to foster a healthy relationship. India’s prosperity should benefit Nepal as well, and vice versa.

What are your suggestions for future prospects?

There has been significant progress in energy cooperation, which is a positive step. However, we should expand student exchange programs on a large-scale, moving beyond limited scholarship schemes. Other potential areas of collaboration include agriculture and dairy productions. India should encourage joint projects in Nepal to further deepen bilateral ties.

How do you view the growing Chinese influence in Kathmandu?

I do not consider Chinese influence as a dominant factor in Nepal-India relations. China has its own aspirations of becoming a geopolitical leader, but what often gets overlooked is the unique and special relationship between Nepal and India rooted in shared social, historical and cultural ties and linguistic similarities.

When we talk about technology in the context of development, we often treat it as a tool that simply exists to make life more efficient. But I see technology as something that shapes our identities, influences our sense of agency and carries ethical responsibilities across generations. This is why we need to reframe ICT4D (Information and Communication Technology for Development) through an ethics-based lens—one that doesn’t just ask what technology can do, but who it serves, how it  empowers and whether it respects the people and cultures it touches. 

Technology isn’t something that arrives in a vacuum, rather it enters communities endowed with their own ways of understanding the world, their own traditions, identities and their own ethical frameworks. If we introduce technology without considering these dimensions, we risk erasing identities rather than strengthening them. According to Martin Heidegger, the essence of technology is not just about tools or instruments; it’s about how technology shapes the way we see and interact with the world. When technology is introduced into a community without awareness of this shift in perception, it can transform local cultures and identities into mere resources to be exploited rather than ways of life that deserve  respect and preservation. For ICT4D to be responsible, it must integrate into the ways of  communities, aligning with their values rather than imposing external ones. 

I have seen  instances where digital tools were designed with good intentions but ended up disrupting  local practices because they failed to acknowledge the social and ethical realities of the  people using them. 

Agency is at the heart of ethical technology use. People should not just be passive  recipients of digital solutions; they should have the power to shape, adapt and use  technology in ways that enhance their lives. Too often, ICT4D projects are rolled out with a top-down approach, where decisions are made by outsiders who assume they know what’s best for the rest. But when people are involved in designing and implementing technology—when they  have ownership over it—it transforms from an external intervention into a meaningful part  of their lives. This isn’t just about usability; it’s about empowerment. It’s about ensuring that communities are not just given tools but also the knowledge, skills and autonomy to decide how those tools should work for them. This perspective aligns with Amartya Sen’s emphasis on agency in development. 

Intergenerational justice, a concept explored by Hans Jonas, is another crucial dimension  that is often overlooked in ICT4D. When we introduce technology, we aren’t just shaping the present; we are making choices that will impact future generations. If we don’t think carefully about the ethical implications of technology, we risk creating dependencies, eroding cultural knowledge or deepening inequalities. Sustainable technology isn’t just about function or economic efficiency; it’s about ensuring that the benefits of today’s  innovations don’t come at the cost of future resilience. 

Environmental sustainability must also be central to ethical ICT4D. As Fritjof Capra  emphasizes in his work on systems thinking, nature operates through interconnected and  self-sustaining networks. Technology should follow these principles, supporting rather than disrupting ecological balance. Too often, technological advancements come at the cost of  ecological health, depleting natural resources and contributing to environmental degradation. If we are to create truly sustainable solutions, we must embrace a philosophy  that respects and aligns with the natural world rather than exploiting it. This means developing digital infrastructures that minimize environmental impact, encouraging circular economies in technology use and integrating local ecological knowledge into digital innovations. Ethical ICT4D must recognize that the well-being of communities is inseparable from the health of the environment that sustains them. 

An ethical ICT4D means recognizing that technology is never just a tool; it is always part of a larger social and ethical system. If we want it to truly serve communities, we need to ask deeper questions: Does this technology respect local identities? Does it enhance people’s agency rather than diminish it? Does it uphold justice not just for this generation, but for the ones that will follow? And does it honor the ecological systems that sustain life? These are the questions that should guide our approach. If we fail to ask them, we risk using technology as a force of disruption rather than as a means of meaningful progress.

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi are likely to hold bilateral talks on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC summit, which is taking place in Thailand on April 3-4.

This will be the second meeting between Oli and Modi; the first meeting was held in September last year on the sidelines of the 76th General Assembly of the United Nations. Despite multiple requests, India is refusing to extend formal invitation to Oli for the official visit to New Delhi. According to government officials, the Oli-Modi meeting is expected to create a conducive environment for Oli’s India visit and Modi’s visit to Nepal. 

Minister for Foreign Affairs Arzu Rana Deuba has said more than once that Oil would soon receive the invitation from New Delhi for the bilateral visit. Presumably, the relationship between the two countries is not as it used to be after Nepal signed a framework agreement on Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The BRI and growing Chinese influence in Kathmandu is a cause of concern for us, says an Indian official requesting anonymity.

The summit was due to take place last year but was postponed in August, when Thailand was under a caretaker administration. The group’s meetings and summit will take place from April 2-4.  The Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation, or BIMSTEC, includes Thailand, India, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bhutan and its leaders meet every two years for a summit. According to media reports, India has informed Thailand that Modi will travel to the country for the summit. As SAARC is completely dysfunctional, India is boosting BIMSTEC for regional cooperation, connectivity and security. 

Have you ever Googled yourself? If you haven’t, you might be shocked by the results that appear when you type your name into the search bar and hit “enter.” This was the experience of Gonzalez, a Spanish national, who discovered news articles from 1998 about his past debt resurfacing online. Despite resolving the issue long ago, this outdated information continued to haunt him, popping up whenever someone searched for his name on the internet. It was as if this unwanted data had become a permanent tattoo he never consented to. Hence, in a world where digital footprints can linger indefinitely, one might wish for a genie to erase such burdensome pasts. In reality, however, that genie took the form of the ‘Right to be Forgotten,’ a legal concept established by the European Court of Justice which subsequently allowed Gonzalez to have his information erased from Google. 

The right to be forgotten empowers individuals to request the removal of outdated or irrelevant information from the internet search engine, allowing them to reclaim control over their digital image and identity. This right is typically granted when the information concerning the individual is considered inadequate, irrelevant, or no longer relevant. By enabling individuals to control the information about the past, this right allows an individual to erase or delete one’s digital footprint. Consequently, search engines like Google or Bing may be required to remove links to websites containing unwanted personal information from their search results.

The rapid advancement of digital technology has led to an exponential increase in the volume of data circulating on the internet. According to statistics from DataReportal, Nepal had approximately 15.4m internet users at the start of 2024. Likewise, the number of social media users stood at 13.5m, accounting for around 43.5 percent of the total population. As internet penetration continues to rise, more individuals will have their information exposed to the domain of the internet. It is the harsh reality that individuals have limited or no control over the information shared online, and once published, such data often attains a permanent status, making its removal nearly impossible. Moreover, with no restrictions on who can post content online, anonymous individuals can share information about others without their consent that will loom over the internet for ages thereby affecting the privacy rights of individuals in the digital space.

Legal scenario

In the context of Nepal, the individual right to privacy is guaranteed and protected under Article 28 of the Constitution. Building upon this constitutional foundation, the Individual Privacy Act of 2018 provides a comprehensive legal framework for safeguarding personal data and related information. This Act mandates that personal information cannot be collected without the explicit consent of the individual concerned and restricts the use of such data strictly to the purposes for which it was gathered. Additionally, the Muluki Criminal Code includes provisions aimed at protecting individual privacy.

Although the prevailing laws offer robust protections against unauthorized data collection and usage, they fall short of addressing the challenges posed by information already available in the public domain. The right to privacy ensures the confidentiality of personal data but does not extend to the removal or deletion of information that has already been disseminated in the public domain.

This lacuna in law can be addressed via the incorporation of the right to be forgotten which will allow the erasure of information already available in the public domain. Countries such as Spain, Germany, Argentina, South Korea, India, Switzerland, and the UK have already embraced this right, allowing individuals greater control over their digital information. As a result, major online platforms including Google, Yahoo, Bing, and Facebook have received thousands of takedown requests from individuals seeking to reclaim their online privacy.

Not an absolute right

It is crucial to recognize that the right to be forgotten is not an absolute right; it is subject to specific limitations and conditions. The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides clear guidelines on when an individual may request the removal of their personal information. Article 17 of the GDPR outlines key circumstances under which this right can be exercised, such as when the data is no longer necessary, when consent is withdrawn, when the data has been unlawfully processed, or when there are no overriding legitimate grounds for retaining the information.

A blanket provision allowing unrestricted use of the right to be forgotten would be neither practical nor desirable. This right must be carefully balanced against freedom of expression and the right to information, as excessive enforcement could be misused to suppress critical discourse or erase public records of legitimate interest. The right to be forgotten, therefore, functions as a double-edged sword, while it safeguards individual privacy, it also has the potential to limit public access to essential information. Hence, striking the right balance is essential. The right to be forgotten should only be upheld in cases where an individual’s privacy rights outweigh the public interest in retaining access to the contested information.

Remedy through courts

In the Nepali context, a writ petition was filed by the authors before the Supreme Court of Nepal, seeking formal recognition of the right to be forgotten. Although the Court ultimately dismissed the petition, it issued a directional order during the final hearing, signaling the need for further legal deliberation on the matter. As the full text of the judgment is yet to be issued, its detailed reasoning and implications on the right to be forgotten remain to be seen; however, the decision is poised to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of digital privacy rights in Nepal.